[weiming]

[CAUTION: I am not a teacher:take the advice and or corrections offered in this post at your own risk.
If you doubt the information, please get a qualified opinion from one of the teachers on these forums.]

riverkid>

First, thanks so much for helping me out with this very tough word. Your praise is most welcome but there are two good reasons for my disclaimer. The first, as pointed out by a moderator,-casiopea-: mere knowledge of the language and its inner workings, as well as ability to explain those inner workings with some considerable coherence, does not qualify me to teach it to anyone. Responding here without a disclaimer is in fact an act of fraud.

The second (and perhaps more reasonable) reason, you provide in the very act of offering further correction and explanation to my explanation: there are still many insufficiencies and flaws in my explanations, people need to be warned.

Having said that, I think that your careful analysis is most instructive, not only to those who may be looking for an explanation, but for myself as well. But then, one of the great rewards of being (or passing oneself off as) a teacher, is learning.

You pointed out one inconsistency: that I say speakers do not differentiate between the two uses of "would". I should have said "verbally". The difference (as you keenly point out) is clear in the mind of the speaker, but invisible in the surface structure of the language when there is no context.

I would see him (if I were you).
I would see him (every day).

The "past tense of the verb" I mentioned is of course the verb "to be". I do not see "would" as the past tense of the verb "will". I don't see "will" and "would" in this context as verbs at all, but modals, "I willed it to happen" being the exception of course.

Yes, absolutely, "will" and "can" when used to make indirect structures with requests are equally polite, but as you point out, "would" being further removed from reality and therefore more indirect (less direct?), seems more polite to some hearers.

Since we are firmly in the territory of minute differences and infinitesimal inflection, I would like to just venture a theory: that there are two "if's", one "imaginary" and one "real", which are again, not distinguished.

The imaginary "if" uses "would"/"were" what have you, and the past tense of the following verb for clarity.

"If you were a chestnut tree, I would still love you."
"If I had a hammer, I would buy some nails."

And so forth. The "real if" operates on existing facts, where one of two outcomes is viewed as inevitable, and uses "will".

"If they come in the front door, leave through the back."

"If he reached the plane on time, he will arrive this afternoon."

"If I am able to contact him, I will tell him about you."

I could not say that "if you are ever hurt..." is imaginary though. "Ever" puts it right on the fringe of reality, but still thought of as real. Note its use in vague assurances.

"If I am ever in your neck of the woods, I will be sure to visit."

The negative though, reminds us that it is in fact, very real. "If you ever do that again, I will fire you."

As opposed to: "If you ever did something like that, I would fire you."

Thanks again for your instructive observations. I look forward to more on this and other topics.

hdrao>

While theoretically, the avid student could read the book from which you draw your reference (apparently without alteration) for herself/himself, I'm very glad to see you taking an active and positive role in answering a question, as a teacher no less. We'll be fast friends yet.