turned up to

[keannu]

In counterfactual present of conditional2, I've seen mostly past tense. When they make an imaginary situation in the present(general time), do they usually make past tense of conditional2, not predictive conditional of conditional1?
I know which to choose between counterfactual present and predictive present wholly depends on the speakers' attitude, but for short senteces, I could see both, but for a long story, it's mostly counterfactual conditional2, not predictive conditonal1. Maybe I'm mistaken.

ex) According to a memory research, you are less likely to remember the smaller, non-humorous details. Humans in general are quite good at recalling unusual or unexpected events, and a perfect example of this is when you find something funny. For example, if one of your colleagues turned up to a serious business meeting dressed as Mickey Mouse, it’s likely you’d remember the funny incident a month later, but probably you would forget about what your other colleagues were wearing, what you had for lunch that day, and perhaps even what important information was presented at the meeting.

[5jj]

The whole point about selecting a distance-marking (past-tense ) form rather than an unmarked (present-tense) form in a conditional sentences is to distance the possibility in reality.

It is not impossible to use an unmarked form in a counterfactual situation, but only in very restricted contexts.

A: Mark says he is a colonel in the Secret Service.
B: If he's a colonel in the Secret Service, then I'm the Pope.

5jj: If keannu doesn't ask a follow-up question, I'll eat my hat.

[keannu]

The whole point about selecting a distance-marking (past-tense ) form rather than an unmarked (present-tense) form in a conditional sentences is to distance the possibility in reality.

It is not impossible to use an unmarked form in a counterfactual situation, but only in very restricted contexts.

A: Mark says he is a colonel in the Secret Service.
B: If he's a colonel in the Secret Service, then I'm the Pope.

5jj: If keannu doesn't ask a follow-up question, I'll eat my hat.

You should understand this fact. Even if I studied English so hard, condtionals are still a great, Mt. Everest-like barrier to Koreans as the Korean language doesn't have that much strict distinction between factual and counter-factual utterances. Koreans don't divide the two situations, so basically we don't have that kind of strict division.

I always swear not to ask, not to ask again, but can't help falling into the question trap. My another doubt is whether imaginary situations are related to the possibility in the present from the spekers' mind. It all depends on the speaker's thoughts, he thinks it's impossible for someone to appear in Mikey Mouse constume in the present, but for others it might seem possible.

But is he telling the story even though he knows that in real situations it can be possible, but just to tell a make-up story?

[5jj]

But is he telling the story even though he knows that in real situations it can be possible, but just to tell a make-up story?

For example, if one of your colleagues turned up to a serious business meeting dressed as Mickey Mouse, it’s likely you’d remember the funny incident a month later ...

You are trying to read far too much into this. The writer is simply presenting the possibility of the colleague turning up as Mickey mouse as a hypothetical situation. The form used suggests that the writer is aware that the realisation of the situation is possible, but unlikely.

[keannu]

For example, if one of your colleagues turned up to a serious business meeting dressed as Mickey Mouse, it’s likely you’d remember the funny incident a month later ...

You are trying to read far too much into this. The writer is simply presenting the possibility of the colleague turning up as Mickey mouse as a hypothetical situation. The form used suggests that the writer is aware that the realisation of the situation is possible, but unlikely.

It all confuses me, the concepts, "hypothetical" "unlikely" "counterfactual". When I said "unlikely" before related to counterfactual present, I remember getting the response that the counterfactual present never has any "unlikely" condition as unlikely is for the future. But this example seems to be the present.

Does "hypothetical" mean some situation that might be possible in reality but you can make up just to show an example situation? Is it quite different from "counterfactual"?

[5jj]

If I get up at six tomorrow, I'll be able to catch the Berlin train.
There is a real possibility of my getting up at six.

If I got up at six tomorrow, I'd be able to catch the Berlin train.
The writer is presenting a hypothetical situation. Without further context, we do not know if there is any real likelihood of his getting up at six or not.

If I were in Berlin now, I'd be going out for a currywurst.
This is a counterfactual hypothesis. The speaker is not in Berlin.

If I had got up at six yesterday, I would have caught the Berlin train.
This is once again counterfactual. The speaker did not get up at six yesterday.

[keannu]

If I get up at six tomorrow, I'll be able to catch the Berlin train.
There is a real possibility of my getting up at six.

If I got up at six tomorrow, I'd be able to catch the Berlin train.
The writer is presenting a hypothetical situation. Without further context, we do not know if there is any real likelihood of his getting up at six or not.

If I were in Berlin now, I'd be going out for a currywurst.
This is a counterfactual hypothesis. The speaker is not in Berlin.

If I had got up at six yesterday, I would have caught the Berlin train.
This is once again counterfactual. The speaker did not get up at six yesterday.

Does this "Mikey Mouse" example belong to future hypothetical situation? When you say "hypothetical", is it only related to the future or present(general time) as well? I remember you or another teacher said some hypothesis is related to general time(the present loosened). It seems that regarding the present, not only counterfactual, but hypothesis about the present(general time) seem involved.

You seem to have said hypothesis about the present(general time) depends on the speakers' attitude, and I think it's correct. So does the present has counterfactual and hypothesis? If so, what's the difference between the two?

[keannu]

Does this "Mikey Mouse" example belong to future hypothetical situation? When you say "hypothetical", is it only related to the future or present(general time) as well? I remember you or another teacher said some hypothesis is related to general time(the present loosened). It seems that regarding the present, not only counterfactual, but hypothesis about the present(general time) seem involved.

You seem to have said hypothesis about the present(general time) depends on the speakers' attitude, and I think it's correct. So does the present has counterfactual and hypothesis? If so, what's the difference between the two?

I'm not challenging your authority as you enlightened so many ignorances of mine, but I've found many writings about conditional2, and many of them like the underlined explain that it can be either impossible(counterfactual) or improbable(unlikely or hypothetical) in the present, so in conditiona2, counterfactual doesn't seem to be the only one factor. I'm not sure.

*****some excerpt about second conditional.
Points to remember about the Second Conditional:

1. They are made up of two clauses: The “If” clause” and the “Result” clause.
2. The order of the clauses can be reversed: I would buy a house if I had a million dollars.*
3. The verb in the “If” clause is in the past simple tense.
4. In the “Result” clause we use would + infinitive
5. The second conditional is used to talk about unreal (impossible or improbable) situations in the present moment.
6. Notice in the sentence “If I were you, I would try to learn English.” I used the verb were. Normally the subject “I” goes with “was.” This is an exception to the rule and both “If I was you…” or “If I were you…” are acceptable.

[5jj]

The book you are quoting from does not give the whole picture.

Points to remember about the Second Conditional:

1. They are made up of two clauses: The “If” clause” and the “Result” clause.It doesn't have to be an 'If' clause. It could be 'unless', 'as long as', 'provided/providing (that)', etc..
2. The order of the clauses can be reversed: I would buy a house if I had a million dollars.*
3. The verb in the “If” clause is in the past simple tense. It can be progressive.
4. In the “Result” clause we use would + infinitive except when we don't.
   
5. The second conditional is used to talk about unreal (impossible or improbable) situations in the present moment. It can be used to talk about the general present, universal time, and the future, as well.

[bhaisahab]

I'm not challenging your authority as you enlightened so many ignorances of mine, but I've found many writings about conditional2, and many of them like the underlined explain that it can be either impossible(counterfactual) or improbable(unlikely or hypothetical) in the present, so in conditiona2, counterfactual doesn't seem to be the only one factor. I'm not sure.

*****some excerpt about second conditional.
Points to remember about the Second Conditional:

1. They are made up of two clauses: The “If” clause” and the “Result” clause.
2. The order of the clauses can be reversed: I would buy a house if I had a million dollars.*
3. The verb in the “If” clause is in the past simple tense.
4. In the “Result” clause we use would + infinitive
5. The second conditional is used to talk about unreal (impossible or improbable) situations in the present moment.
6. Notice in the sentence “If I were you, I would try to learn English.” I used the verb were. Normally the subject “I” goes with “was.” This is an exception to the rule and both “If I was you…” or “If I were you…” are acceptable.

Where is the excerpt from? If you are copying something from a publication you should acknowledge its provenance.