Thread: English subjunctive

If I was to go home yesterday, then I missed my flight

I believe it'd have made sense if it had been written thusly --->

"If I was to have gone home, I'd have missed my flight".

Dear God.

Look guys, there's a thread at the top of general discussions that you should have a look at. It says something about an ignorant's playground.

kwatts59
I do not see any problem with

If I went home yesterday, then . . .

versus

If I had gone home yesterday, then . . .

versus

If I was to go home yesterday, then . . .


At least in American English they all have the same meaning and are completely interchangeable. If you think the last one is gramatically incorrect then I cannot argue.

Rubbish. Only the second of those is grammatically correct, and it has absolutely nothing to do with differences between British and American English, the others are simply wrong.

If I had/ I'd gone home yesterday, then... or

Had I gone home yesterday, then...

Chaika
"If I was to go home yesterday" means "If I was supposed to go home yesterday...."

kwatts - finish those sentences that end in "then..." and see what you come up with.

Since those are both grammatically incorrect, they may well mean the same thing, but they're still both wrong. Correctly, they should be rendered:

If I were/was* to have gone home yesterday, then... or

Were I to have gone home yesterday, then...

and

If I were/ was* supposed to have gone home yesterday...

*This use of "was" is what Pravit was originally asking about. This could be considered to be questionable grammar but, as has been said previously, only a pedant would complain about it, and in speech even a real pedant probably wouldn't notice it.

kwatts59
If I was to go home yesterday, then I would not have been late for the funeral.

If I was to go home yesterday, then my wife would have been happy to see me.

If I was to go home yesterday, then I missed my flight.

If I went home yesterday, then I would not have been late for the funeral.

If I went home yesterday, then my wife would have been happy to see me.

You seriously need to go take some English lessons. Not one of those examples is grammaticaly correct. Not one. It doesn't matter where you stress them, it doesn't mater what brand of English you are talking, they are just wrong. You're not even having a problem with the subjunctive as such, just with general tense.

There's nothing wrong with being basically illiterate, but you've got a damned cheek advising anyone else on a subject you quite evidently do not understand.

brett
I believe it'd have made sense if it had been written thusly --->

"If I was to have gone home, I'd have missed my flight".

If I had gone home yesterday, I would have missed my flight.

You're getting your causalities in a knot. Intention has nothing to do with result in this case.

If I was supposed to have gone home yesterday, then I would have gone home, and I would have missed my flight.

You guys are very lucky that you

Let me see, an American and an Aussie giving tips on grammar........hmm...interesting!

Originally Posted by scotcher

Dear God.

Look guys, there's a thread at the top of general discussions that you should have a look at. It says something about an ignorant's playground.

kwatts59
I do not see any problem with

If I went home yesterday, then . . .

versus

If I had gone home yesterday, then . . .

versus

If I was to go home yesterday, then . . .


At least in American English they all have the same meaning and are completely interchangeable. If you think the last one is gramatically incorrect then I cannot argue.

Rubbish. Only the second of those is grammatically correct, and it has absolutely nothing to do with differences between British and American English, the others are simply wrong.

If I had/ I'd gone home yesterday, then... or

Had I gone home yesterday, then...

Scotcher, how could there possibly be anything wrong with the following sentence?

If I went home yesterday, then I would not have missed the funeral.

IF <conditional sentence>, THEN <resulting sentence>.

What is the difference between "I had gone home" versus "I went home"?
The difference is so minor that nobody would care.
To say that the sentence "I went home" is grammatically incorrect is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by "kwatts59

What is the difference between "I had gone home" versus "I went home"? The difference is so minor that nobody would care.
To say that the sentence "I went home" is grammatically incorrect is ridiculous.

Actually, Scotcher is right, and - well, I do care about getting it right.

Sure, "I went home" is a perfectly fine sentence. But that's not the sentence in question! Can you say "I would not have missed the funeral" by itself? No. You have to explain further. As soon as you make a sentence conditional, it's dependent on the second half- you cannot have the "if" without the "then".

The following sentence is grammatically incorrect:
"If I went home yesterday, then I would not have missed the funeral."

You must keep the same tense in the whole sentence. "Went" is just plain old past tense. "Have missed" is past perfect. You just can't mix them like that.

Originally Posted by Moryachka

Originally Posted by kwatts59

What is the difference between "I had gone home" versus "I went home"? The difference is so minor that nobody would care.
To say that the sentence "I went home" is grammatically incorrect is ridiculous.

Actually, Scotcher is right, and - well, I do care about getting it right.

Sure, "I went home" is a perfectly fine sentence. But that's not the sentence in question! Can you say "I would not have missed the funeral" by itself? No. You have to explain further. As soon as you make a sentence conditional, it's dependent on the second half- you cannot have the "if" without the "then".

The following sentence is grammatically incorrect:
"If I went home yesterday, then I would not have missed the funeral."

You must keep the same tense in the whole sentence. "Went" is just plain old past tense. "Have missed" is past perfect. You just can't mix them like that.

I understand what you are saying. You are saying that the "if" part of the conditional sentence must match tenses with the "then" part of the sentence.

IF <past perfect sentence>, THEN <past perfect result>.

IF <past sentence>, THEN <past result>.

I tend to disagree. What is the gramatically correct way of saying

If I went home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

What is the gramatically correct way of saying

If I went home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today.

"If I had gone home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today."

*conditional clause - a type of adverbial subordinate clause. Conditional clauses are usually introduced by if or unless. (If I win a million dollars, I'll travel around the world.) Conditional clauses may also occur without a conjunction, as in "Had I known you then, we could have had a lot of fun together."
-- www.uib.no/People/mbibt/Grammar.doc


try this: http://www.usingenglish.com/articles/en ... onals.html
--check out what they call the "third conditional" - that's what you're having trouble with.

If you like, I can rummage around for more info.
If you would like, I could rummage around for more info.
If you were to ask, I would rummage around for more info.

Originally Posted by Moryachka

Originally Posted by kwatts59

What is the gramatically correct way of saying

If I went home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today.

"If I had gone home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today."

*conditional clause - a type of adverbial subordinate clause. Conditional clauses are usually introduced by if or unless. (If I win a million dollars, I'll travel around the world.) Conditional clauses may also occur without a conjunction, as in "Had I known you then, we could have had a lot of fun together."
-- www.uib.no/People/mbibt/Grammar.doc


try this: http://www.usingenglish.com/articles/en ... onals.html
--check out what they call the "third conditional" - that's what you're having trouble with.

If you like, I can rummage around for more info.
If you would like, I could rummage around for more info.
If you were to ask, I would rummage around for more info.

This UsingEnglish.com website is informative. Thanks.

On the second conditional, they state "if" + <simple past> + "would" + <base verb>. Here is their example:

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

Therefore, the following sentences are gramatically correct.

If I went home, I would watch TV.

If I made a mistake, I would apologize.

If I went home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today.


Your response to my question is not gramatically correct according to the UsingEnglish.com website.

Originally Posted by Moryachka

"If I had gone home yesterday, then I would not be sitting here today."

According to the third conditional, it should be
If I had gone home yesterday, then I would not have sat here today.

In conclusion,
If + <simple past>, then "would" + <base verb>. (Second conditional)
If + <past perfect>, then "would have" + <past particple>. (Third conditional)

This is what a professional editor from another forum had to say about the original question on this thread;

The subjunctive is complex and very useful. \"If one were to..\" is not subjunctive; it's conditional. If i were you, i'd learn the subjuncive well. If one were to know it well, he could do great things with the language. I'll tell you more soon. Must run. Today i can give you a better explanation.

He was a bit rushed in writing this message, obviously, but it seems that 'were' is the correct word. But, this person I quoted may have some sort of irregularities to tell of, who knows? But for now, it seems that Pravit's question has been answered; 'were' is correct.