Re: Why is it correct ?

Donna Richoux wrote:

Peter Moylan <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Django Cat wrote:

DC. Many of them don't even know what the Third Conditional is!

Despite having read many ESL questions in this group over the
years, I still haven't figured out what the first two are.

I see it's not in the FAQ, but there is a link in Intro B:
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conditional2.htm

Over the years we've posted several descriptions of "First, Second,
and Third Conditionals" and I'm not sure they always agree.

If the definitions posted to AUE were correct, they'd agree. [That's a
Conditional 2, BTW]. I did offer to write an AUE-oriented definition
for the FAQ a few months back, an offer which still stands.

These are straightforward, non-woolly concepts and they aren't rocket
science either:

*[1]* Action in a possible/likely future circumstance:

"If I see her, I'll tell her".

Simple present 'if' clause [also works with words like 'unless' or
'until'] + some form of future:

"Till you come back to me, that's what I'm gonna do." (Stevie Wonder -
an extreme example, but still Conditional 1)


*[2]* Hypothesis:
"If I had a hammer, I'd hammer in the morning." (I don't have a hammer).

'If' clause moves back a tense, result clause made with modal would or
could, often contracted to 'd.

Popular culture and songs are full of these:

"If I ruled the world, every man would be as free as a bird".

or even

"If we could talk to the animals, learn their languages
Maybe take an animal degree
We'd study elephant and eagle, buffalo and beagle
Alligator, guinea pig, and flea".

*[3]* Speculation over past events which cannot now be altered:

"If I hadn't bumped into her I'd never have found out they'd moved".

But I *did* bump into her. Here everything moves back yet another
tense:

'I didn't bump into her...' [simple past]

becomes the deeper

'If I hadn't bumped into her' [Past perfect]

There's also the recently discovered 'Zero Conditional':

[0] Always true:
"If you heat water it boils".


The point about these is that they are solid chunks of language which a
*learner* can hang their hat on and use to generate real language. Not
that even good English speakers always get them right; how often have
you heard a Dutch speaker say "if I would see him, I would tell him",
Donna?

The other thing is that native speakers aren't exposed to these
concepts unless they've taught ESL/EFL. Why should they be? They're
ABC to millions of language learners, but because they originate in a
pedagogic approach to grammar and language analysis, native learners
don't need to know about them, and you won't find them in Fowler and
his ilk. In the same way, I've no idea how the muscles in my legs
work, but that doesn't stop me walking.

Sorry to bang on. The real thing here is that the OP's question is
similarly fundamental to learners: the difference between a simple form:

"I had breakfast"

and the perfect form

"I've had breakfast".

Native speakers make this distinction, and use 123 Conditionals,
several hundred times a day, but ask them to explain why and they'll
jump through hoops and chase their tails. This is one reason why
recently qualified EFL teachers tend to have a hard time; they may be
native speakers, but their students know far more about EFL grammar
than they do (and some groups - notoriously German speakers - know this
and love to put new teachers in a tricky spot by asking awkward
questions).

Nuff said. I tend not to come in on learners' questions too much on
AUE (I usually get paid to teach), but the answers to this poor lad
were rapidly disappearing down the pan.

DC
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Another stupid singular "their"
    ... You have training in language use. ... taught me to speak English, seems to indicate that one is one of those ... Only the untrained user seems king here, ... "Although this is how most native speakers say it, it is not clear, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: that
    ... uses English correctly and has insight into what is or is not ... as the traditionally defined English native speakers. ... native speakers' knowledge of the language, ... Let me explain what the rules in the grammar books you are reading ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: History of French
    ... > Which native speakers? ... One English idiolect per native speaker of the abstract language we ... toilet, that things were better 50 years ago, yadda yadda yadda. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: [OT] Indian C programmers and "u"
    ... > they have been learning the language for some time). ... > that native speakers generally know very little outside colloquial ... know more about supposed rules of English grammar. ... With regard to semantics, it's not so clear that non-native speakers ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Abbreviations "sb" and "sth"
    ... only in addressing second-language learners and not in addressing ... Do native speakers have less use for the terms ... sentence patterns, so they have little need for these words as placeholders. ... ESL teachers and learners deal with sentence patterns all the time, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
Loading