1

This sentence is grammatical?

Students who would go to the lab will go there again tomorrow.

context: Monday 4pm they should do some experiments in the lab, but 3 pm their teacher asked them to do group assignments in classroom first. Monday 8pm I'am saying this sentence. And I know Tuesday they should go there again.

I'm sorry it looks complicated. But I really want to know it works or not.

Thanks so much in advance!

  • 1
    Students who were to go to the lab today will go tomorrow instead. (That's if they did not go today; it's hard to tell from your question. Can you make it a little more clear? Did the students stay in the classrom today instead of going to the lab?) The sentence you wrote is grammatical, but not idiomatic, and it's hard to make sense of it without a bit more explanation. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Sep 18 '16 at 1:27
2

Consider this option: 

Students who would have gone to the lab today will instead go there tomorrow. 

Part of the problem with your original sentence is that the "would" of "would go" could be either the past-tense form or the subjunctive form of the auxiliary "will".  In the past tense, "would go" can mean something like "had the habit of going".  In the subjunctive mode, it can mean something like "have the (conditional/hypothetical/potential/etc.) intention of going". 

If I understand your context correctly, you want to use both the subjunctive mode (to indicate that going today is contrary to fact, that it didn't happen and won't happen) and the past tense (to indicate that the intention, even if merely hypothetical, no longer exists in the present). 

For this verb, like most verbs, the past-tense and subjunctive forms are identical.  There is no sensible way in English to combine the two.  However, we can easily combine the subjunctive mode with the so-called perfect aspect.  In turn, the perfect aspect implies an occurrence in the past because it expresses some result of that occurrence. 

The verb phrase "would have gone" displays the active voice, subjunctive mode, present tense and perfect aspect. 

 

Another part of the problem is that going today didn't happen, so "going again" doesn't make sense.  Visiting the lab tomorrow is a replacement for visiting the lab today, not an addition to it. 

There are ways to use the word "again" which do make sense.  For example: 

Students who would have gone to the lab today will try again tomorrow. 

This sentence implies that the students made an attempt today, although the attempt was unsuccessful.  Trying to visit the lab tomorrow is an addition to having already tried today. 

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks so much for your kind help!!!!!! I really appreciate it. But what if I don't know if they went to the lab. I just know they were required to go there. And for some reason, they need to go there again tomorrow. Can I say:" Students who would go to the lab will go there tomorrow." – moyeea Oct 18 '16 at 16:44
  • No. "Students who would go to the lab will go there tomorrow" means either "Students who used to have the habit of going to the lab will go there tomorrow" or "Students who intend to go to the lab will go there tomorrow". Also, if it doesn't matter whether they went today, why mention it at all? Doesn't "students in this class will go to the lab tomorrow" express your intended meaning? – Gary Botnovcan Oct 19 '16 at 13:19
  • Thanks so much for your kind help, sir!!! That means the meaning is unclear right sir? But is it possible to say: Students who was going to the lab will try again tomorrow. – moyeea Oct 19 '16 at 14:51
0

I think you should say it like this.

Students who were to go to the lab today will have to do it again tomorrow.

And then you should explain the reason.

| improve this answer | |
  • But if I say: A country which get developed in the first ten years will make new assignments in the next ten years(here I don't need to say which will get developed) right? – moyeea Sep 18 '16 at 11:30
  • I don't understand what you mean by "get developed " and in what way it is connected with the previous sentence. Perhaps it should be "developed ". – V.V. Sep 18 '16 at 12:26
  • Yes, thanks so much for your help. Can I say:A country which developed in the first ten years will make new assignments in the next ten years. This sentence makes sense? – moyeea Sep 18 '16 at 12:57
  • A country (is "any country") which developed during the first ten years (of its existence? ) would set new goals for the next ten years. I don't see much sense though. Make it a new question. But think it over. – V.V. Sep 18 '16 at 13:33
  • Thanks so much for your kind help,I just want to know if I should put "will" or not. """Students who finish their first 5-year study will continue their second 5-year study.(to new students) """""or I should say: """Students who will finish their first 5-year study will continue their second 5-year study."""Thanks so much! – moyeea Sep 19 '16 at 0:03
0

With yours:

Students who would go to the lab will go there again tomorrow.

'Would' is definitely not the correct word. 'Would' suggests that they might go in future. They are definitely in the lab. Therefore they are 'present'.

I would add the word 'revisit' as well to make the sentence flow better.

Students present in the lab today should revisit the lab tomorrow.

| improve this answer | |
  • But if it is like: "At that time, they were asked to go to the lab.so they would go to the lab, but the meeting was canceled. But tomorrow, they need to go there again. Can I say:Students who would go to the lab will go there again? – moyeea Oct 18 '16 at 12:36
  • 1
    "Students who should've been present at the meeting that was cancelled, should revisit the lab tomorrow" - Would be far better. I don't think what you're saying works because it implies that the students that 'want' to go should go to the lab tomorrow. – SuperHanz98 Oct 18 '16 at 13:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.