2

As far as I know, UNREAL present conditionals which uses the format If + past tense verb.., then + would + verb..., are used for conditions which are practically NOT possible, but theoretically possible and counterfactual situations.

Examples:

If I won a lottery, I would travel around the world.

If I were the king, I would abolish capital punishment.

However, how do you explain these examples which are theoretically and practically possible?

You would lose weight if you took more exercise.

If he got a new job, he would probably make more money.

I think if I went to look at more gardens, I would be better at Planning and designing them

.

Getting a new job, exercising, and looking at gardens are very likely things.

I can say those sentences with real conditionals using 'will."

Improve this question
2
  • If I win the lottery, I will travel around the world, pay off my mortgage, or buy a case of beer, depending on the amount,
    – Michael Harvey
    Commented Aug 2 at 15:38
  • 1
    If I win the lottery... often implies more chance of it happening than If I won the lottery..., and full-blown subjunctive If I were to win the lottery... often implies less chance.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Aug 2 at 17:39

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

As far as grammar is concerned there is no difference between something that is 'possible but extremely unlikely' and 'possible and somewhat likely'. They are both hypothetical situations, and the grammar is the same when they are expressed in this 'subjunctive' or 'irrealis' manner.

As Michael Harvey points out, you can also express hypotheticals using active verbs, in which case they need to use tenses that have a logical relationship to each other in time (present and future). If using irrealis forms, the past forms ('would', 'should', 'could' etc) are considered most 'correct' (although it can be very flexible in reality).

English speakers flip between 'subjunctive' forms and 'active' forms in these hypothetical situations almost at random, and the distinction between the different ways of saying things is marginal at best. See this answer I gave to another question: https://ell.stackexchange.com/a/355057/2789

Improve this answer
2
  • Thanks fred2. You mention here " If using irrealis forms, the past forms ('would', 'should', 'could' etc) are considered most 'correct' (although it can be very flexible in reality)." However, some of your examples in the given link have different tense combinations. e.g., If I were to learn English, I will be well-advised to practice. Also, If I am to learn English, I would be well-advised to practice. Could you please clarify?
    – BumbleBee
    Commented Aug 3 at 13:04
  • 1
    We're really talking about formal versus spoken English. When spoken, people can be very lax about their choice of active or subjunctive forms, and almost mix and match without appearing "wrong" to listeners. As a learner one should probably stick to whatever forms are recommended.
    – fred2
    Commented Aug 4 at 17:56
0

I. Second Conditional isn't impossible.
The third conditional is totally impossible to happen because it is past and we cannot change it.
But this is not the case with imagined conditions in the First and Second Conditionals.

II. Explanation : Imagined Conditions

Ref. Cambridge dictionary.
Imagined conditions There are different types of conditions. Some are possible or likely, others are unlikely, and others are impossible:.

III. Imagined conditions: The second conditional.
Ref. Cambridge dictionary

We use the second conditional to talk about the possible result of an imagined situation in the present or future. We say what the conditions must be for the present or future situation to be different.
If people complained, things would change. (People don’t complain at the moment.)

IV. Applying this to OP's sentences.
Please find below OP's sentences and my comments in bold and italics.

  1. You would lose weight if you took more exercise.
    (But you don't exercise enough now.)
  2. If he got a new job, he would probably make more money.
    (But he doesn't have a job.)
  3. I think if I went to look at more gardens, I would be better at Planning and designing them.
    (I am thinking and haven't acted upon it.)
Improve this answer
2
  • Second conditionals are used for hypotheticals (as in my examples). As per definition, hypotheticals are things that are not happening or have not yet happened. So, what about the first conditional? They also have NOT YET happened. So I think classification based on the probability of happening is more correct? Less probable - second, more probable -first.
    – BumbleBee
    Commented Aug 9 at 20:12
  • @BumbleBee You are correct. Consider - 1. If you study hard, you will get good marks. 2. If you studied hard, you would get good marks. The first sentence is a general truth. We use the first conditional when we talk about future situations we believe are real or possible. Second sentence The second conditional is used to imagine present or future situations that are impossible or unlikely in reality. If I were a bird, I would fly high in the sky. (Impossible to happen)
    – James Mathai
    Commented Aug 10 at 2:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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