2

My non-native English-speaking friend asked me the question, and I said one way, but her other native English-speaking friend said the opposite and I wanted to hear other opinions.

She asked, which of these is better (imagining you're on the top of a mountain):

We couldn't have come here if it was raining.

vs

We couldn't have come here if it had been raining.

I said I prefer the second, her other English-speaking friend said they prefer the first. Is there a difference? Are they both acceptable? Is it a regional difference?

Improve this question
2
  • 3
    The second version is more grammatically correct. Some people might use the first one in casual speech and it would be understood.
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented Nov 10, 2021 at 8:59
  • Can we assume it's still not raining?
    – gotube ♦
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 3:39

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
1

Both are correct. But how?

These sentences both use "unreal" grammar. The reason they're both correct will make more sense if we change them back to real sentences with the same meaning:

(1) We have been able to come here because it isn't raining.

(2) We were able to come here because it wasn't raining.

Sentence (1) refers to the present situation of now being at the top of the mountain, and the present fact that it's not raining. Sentence (2) refers to the past situation of arriving at the top of the mountain with the past reason why. So it's two perspectives on the same thing: either (1) now being at the top of the mountain, or (2) having arrived earlier.

I've highlighted the two main verbs. You'll notice they don't have the same tense, even though the original two sentences have the exact same structure*. This is because when we shift present perfect or simple past into "unreal" grammar, the result is the same: "could have" + past participle.

*I've also replaced "couldn't" with "be able to" for grammar reasons which are unrelated to this question.

Improve this answer
1

Both are correct, it depends on the time. You say the second one, for instance, when you tell this memory to a friend a year later because it's the third conditional. It's explained on British Council Learn English website as;

''The third conditional is used to imagine a different past. We imagine a change in a past situation and the different result of that change.''

Improve this answer
1

The simple past ("was") is used to discuss possibilities. The past perfect ("had been") is used to discuss counterfactuals. That is, if you're uncertain about whether something happened, and want to discuss the consequences of it being the case, the simple past is appropriate. For instance, "If it was raining, they will be late". If you know something didn't happen, but want to discuss a hypothetical world in which it did happen, the past perfect is correct.

Improve this answer
0

One does not say, "If it was..", but "If it were..." This is the subjunctive mood, used in stating a condition known to be false.

Tevye is grammatically correct asking, "If I were a rich man."

Improve this answer
4
  • That rule was a prescriptive one, and now isn't a rule at all. When Gwen Stefani covered that same song in 2004, she deliberately changed the grammar to "If I was a rich girl". I've always felt she made that choice because "If I were..." was an old rule falling by the wayside, and using "If I was..." made her sound more modern.
    – gotube ♦
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 3:20
  • @gotube, Grammar often is used to differentiate people, whether rightly or wrongly. If one teaches students to use the vernacular, it can impact application for school and jobs. "Ain't" is in the dictionary, but should be avoided in formal use. For the same reason, an English learner should be taught -commonly accepted usage.
    – DrMoishe Pippik
    Commented Nov 11, 2021 at 19:22
  • I heartily agree with every word you said. I think you and I disagree about whether "If I was..." is still vernacular, and I'm fine with that. :)
    – gotube ♦
    Commented Nov 12, 2021 at 22:12
  • For what it's worth, some standard ESL textbooks teach that both are acceptable, like Grammar In Use Intermediate 4th edition.
    – gotube ♦
    Commented Nov 12, 2021 at 22:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .