I’m learning conditional sentences recently ,and I’m confused by the two sentences below because they don’t seem to fit any type of conditional sentences my grammar book categorizes.
I think they look like mixed conditionals of type 2 and 3, but I’m not sure.
According to the book, the the main clause of type 2 is accompanied by common modals such as will, can, may, might, should; And the main clause of type 3 is accompanied by the modals would or could.
I’m not sure if I can use would in type two. If I can, what would be the the difference between using will and using would(I don’t even know whether this sentence is correct anymore😨).
Here are two sentences extracted from The Economist. Could you tell me which categories do they belong?
But it would be a surprise if the presidential election scheduled to take place in Venezuela is allowed to threaten the position of the country’s dictator, Nicolás Maduro.
That would be make it seem like a type 3, but that is allowed to seems like a type 2.
Finding a viable way to mine outer space’s plentiful supplies of platinum, for example, would surely lead to a meteoric descent in the price of the metal.
Is this even a conditional sentence? The book says nothing of this kind. Why did the author use would instead of will here? That would makes it sound like a past tense.
———————————————————— Skip this if you already know what conditional sentences are.