New answers tagged

0

Firstly, note that the best gift [that] I [have] ever have isn't a "sentence" - it's a "noun phrase" (within which the "head noun" is gift). Also note that it's perfect okay to include or omit either/both the "relativiser" that and the "auxiliary verb" have, and this has no effect on the meaning (it's ...


0

Both are correct. If I had won the lottery, I would be travelling the world. This means "If I had won the lottery, I would (now) be travelling the world": I'd be travelling the world now. If I had won the lottery, I would have travelled the world. This means "If I had won the lottery, I would have (already) travelled the world": I'd ...


0

I'd argue there's a tonal difference between at least I lived and at least I have lived - the former places the "living" in the past, gives the sense of past experiences, and gives it more of a bittersweet feel than "I have lived" (which puts less distance between the speaker and those experiences). It can also be read as "dying is ...


2

As Chris says, "the word “if” makes this a fairly odd/questionable statement altogether (though it may admittedly be warranted by some context) but, strictly speaking, I see no grammatical problems." The version with "have lived" would be preferable (this is a normal context for present perfect meaning "a state starting in the past ...


2

Note that: "Would" is morphologically past tense and acts as the past tense of "will", and is used (among other things) for the future-in-the-past In a type 2 conditional, the verb in the protasis (the "if" clause) is also past tense (even irrealis "were" was traditionally called "past subjunctive"), even ...


1

"Should" can introduce the condition clause of a first conditional, but it can also introduce a zero conditional with an imperative in the results clause, as in your example. However, whereas a simple present can be used in both clauses to express a general truth, "should" can't be used in those kinds of zero conditional. For example, you ...


1

This is an example of a mixed conditional - while most conditional sentences follow the usual 0-1-2-3 patterns, it's perfectly valid to mix tenses between conditional clauses if it expresses the tense relationship better. In your case, the unreal past in the result is meaningful - making it unreal implies that it wasn't the case in reality, perhaps because ...


0

If he refuses to remove the instruction, it will confuse people. If he refuses to remove the instruction, it would confuse people. Correct, implication is that the instruction is still in the note and you are discussing whether or not he will remove it, presumably before it is used. If he refused to remove the instruction, it will confuse people. If he ...


Top 50 recent answers are included