Korean Job Discussion Forums

[spyro25]

i'm a little confused as to how this works

my students were using past simple form with 'if' to talk about something they might do in the future.

the example was 'if i went to a bank, could i ask the teller.........'

i was confused here about saying 'if i go to a bank' between 'if i went to a bank'. the same kind of problem occured in a number of other students utterances where they used the past tense form of the verb in this statement.

another example was 'if i saw a magpie in the morning then it is bad luck'
i thought it should be 'if i see a magpie in the morning then it is bad luck'

any ideas what is going on here? i think it is to do with whether the subordinate clause is in present simple (it is) versus the conditional (it would be). we are trying to discuss common superstitions in korean culture. am i right in my thinking about this one?

[J.B. Clamence]

Past tense is used in conditionals to suggest an impossible or unlikely scenario. Thus "If I went to a bank..." would imply that you probably will not actually go to the bank, but you are simply suggesting what you would do in that hypothetical situation.

Present tense would be used for situation which may realistically happen. "If I go to the bank..." implies that you may indeed go to the bank.

Another example to show this rule is "If I won the lottery..." We use past tense because your chances of winning the lottery are slim to none.

[faster]

J.B. is right - the variation with conditionals is degree of likelihood, with past tenses generally offering a lower one. Past can also be used conditionally to distance speaker from listener, sometimes for politeness ("Could you loan me $5?"). And, of course, sometimes as a time referent.

Another point is that the verbs must agree: "If I went to the bank could I withdraw all my money?" or "If I kill you now will I go to jail?"

Notice, in the last example, that "will," although it creates a future tense with "go" is, itself, present. That's an easy way to teach the verb agreement: unless there's a time change, the first verbs in very phrases must agree.

[Novernae]

Yes, the difference is in the chance of it happening.

The past subjunctive tense is only acceptable in the more improbable or hypothetical situation, not in talking about something they might do in the future, in which case the present tense should be used.

To use your own examples:

If I went to a bank, could I ask the teller to do it for me?... Hypothetical situation, may or may not happen, or you are looking for a solution to the problem, and this might be it.
If I go to the bank, can I ask the teller to do it for me?... You are thinking of going to the bank and if you do, you want to know if you can ask.

Think of the next example.
Your student:
"If i saw a magpie in the morning then it is bad luck." Here they are mixing up the two, which is not correct. It should be either:

If I saw a magpie in the morning, it would be bad luck. (some hypothetical situation, and how they would react if such a hypothetical situation were to occur)

If I see a magpie in the morning, it will be bad luck. (they have a test on Wednesday and if they see a magpie that morning, they will do poorly on the test.)

edited: to add the word subjunctive...

[Hater Depot]

[jodemas2]

[Novernae]

[faster]

Well, I meant the individual verb (the auxiliary, used to make up what you refer to as the conditional or the subjunctive), so you could say "past conditional" or something.

But the way I see (and teach) it, there are only 2 proper tenses in English, and conjugation bears that out. All the other moods and voices use verb phrases, each verb of which is past or present. So "I will go" is future time, but present tense. This is an elegant way to easily identify verb agreement in complex sentences and a convenient way to underscore the fact that tense is only loosely related to time, if at all.

[mediano tzu]

Right, so the hypothetical thing makes sense to me, but what about the following:

None of us is going.

None of us are going.

Which is correct and why?

I know this is off-topic, but I don't see any need to start a new thread for this.

[Novernae]

[Novernae]

[mediano tzu]

[faster]

Novernae is definitely right.

[J.B. Clamence]

[denverdeath]

A pretty good explanation from:

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional.htm



Some more info here:

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional2.htm