Change a Given Conditional Clauses into Imaginary and Impossible Clauses

Question

I need to Change the Given conditional clauses into its other 2 types, i.e., into its imaginary and impossible clause.

"I will help you, if it's possible"

My approach:

Ans

I am confused when I have written that:

because its can be used as an adjective as well as pronoun or should I use 3rd person singular concept here, it may be than?

As discussed before: this needs breaking down into individual, specific questions. — Stephie, Aug 28 '15 at 5:54
I agree with Stephie. Also, even after this question is broken down and posted individually, you still should write about your idea. Writing about your idea what the answer is and why can help your learning, and at the same time will help our answerers to assess points needed to be addressed better. — Damkerng T., Aug 28 '15 at 6:31
@JalajChawla - Some more editing hints, for the future: (1) Don't use the sentence you are working on as the title of your question – it doesn't tell us what you are trying to ask. (2) Be tidy, not sloppy. Use proper spacing around punctuation and avoid mistakes like a llower-case "i". These are distracting and make your question harder to understand. Lastly, as to your question ("Should it be "if it was possible," or "if it were possible"), that's a toughy. If I were you, I'd read Hellion's answer here. — J.R.♦, Aug 28 '15 at 9:06

StoneyB on hiatus · Accepted Answer · 2015-08-30 12:10:45Z

I'm pretty sure that the forms you are looking for are:

I would help you if it were possible.
I would have helped you if it had been possible.

Those are the forms which match the three 'canonical' conditionals which are usually taught in EFL classes.

But:

These are not clauses but constructions which each involve two clauses.
The distinction of these constructions as "imaginary" and "impossible" is inaccurate.
There are far more variations available than just these two, including a variation employing would help ... was.

It's is always a contraction of it is, never an "adjective" (actually a possessive pronoun). And its is always the possessive pronoun.

Yes,Thankx for adding the point Sir.Also i didn't got Why you used were in the first conditions? — Jalaj Chawla, Aug 30 '15 at 12:26
@JalajChawla Because that's the 'standard' irrealis (or subjunctive or hypothetical or imaginary or whatever-you-call-it) form. Realis (indicative) was in the condition clause with would in the consequence clause would mean something different: it would mark past tense rather than modality. — StoneyB on hiatus, Aug 30 '15 at 12:46

1 Answer 1