second conditional

jotham · Post by **jotham** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:58 am

On your Google link, there were only 19 hits if you follow through on them. Most of them were repeats apparently. Compare that to the 71,000 hits for "if I go tomorrow" and that should make it's own case.
The examples on those English-grammar websites sound okay to me as does your last sentence. Perhaps because those examples don't have anything to do with what actions you intend to take, which your Google example and the previous cowgirl-story example is.

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:24 am

Yes, the numbers certainly speak for themselves!

I think BrE has no problem using "2nd Conditional" to discuss real possible options:

So, if I came on Wednesday we would go shopping but if I came on Thursday we'd go to the theatre. Now let me decide.

whereas that web-site emphasises the impossibility of each situation, as does "If I were coming tomorrow" to a great extent.

MrPedantic · Post by **MrPedantic** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:59 am

JuanTwoThree wrote: Metal56, I think Mr P was questioning Jotham's assertion...

Just to confirm, M56: it was indeed a misquotation, as Juan suggests. Probably a tag went astray.

jotham wrote: Juan's sentence forces an awareness of this past-present dichotomy, so I'll address it.
You'd get more money if you sold it on Ebay in six months time.

When I casually skim over the sentence, I'm not bothered or jolted by it, but it clearly isn't a sentence I would ever catch myself writing, saying, or consciously teaching.

...

But again, it doesn't necessarily startle me when I hear it the other way.

Thanks for that, Jotham. It's worth knowing that the example might chime oddly for some AmE speakers. As Juan says:

JuanTwoThree wrote: ...it would be very interesting if AmE really had a different concept from BrE of irrealis in the future.

...

It's just that this is not mentioned anywhere as far as I can see.

If I understand correctly, the difference doesn't relate to the "If I were to do X" form of the "type II" conditional, but the "If I did X" form.

As an aside, I've noticed that some students on ESL forums acquire a notion that the "type II" relates only to impossible or extremely improbable hypotheses – perhaps from sites such as this:

CCCF wrote:
Compare:
If I become president, I will change the social security system. (Said by a presidential candidate)

If I became president, I would change the social security system. (Said by a schoolboy: improbable)

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

Which seems simply wrong to me – I take the difference as one of "distance", rather than "probability"; the two speakers could easily be reversed.

But if there are slight differences between different dialects, it may begin to explain the otherwise puzzling advice on some of these sites.

Best wishes,

MrP