1

In dictionary,

if it wasn’t/weren’t for…:

used to say that somebody/something stopped somebody/something from happening

If it weren't for you, I wouldn't be alive today. (seem like conditional sentence type 2 - unreal at the present time)

But I saw these in another site

We use if it was / were not for + noun to say that one situation is dependent on another situation.

If it wasn’t / weren’t for the fireman, my dog would have died in the fire. (if it is Conditional sentence Type 2, then why they use "would have died" in the main clause & "was/were" in the conditional clause?)

Other expressions

If it hadn’t been for my parents, I wouldn’t have gone to university. (Conditional sentence Type 3, unreal in the past)

So, is this sentence wrong: If it wasn’t / weren’t for the fireman, my dog would have died in the fire.?

Because if it is Conditional sentence Type 2, then why they use "would have died" in the main clause & "was/were" in the conditional clause?

Anh here says:

but for=if it were not for

He would have played but for a knee injury. (it uses "would have played" in the main clause but it uses "were" in the conditional clause )

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.