Normal grammatical order

[Steven D]

Were the book on the table, it wouldn't be where it is now.

Were I to tell you, you would have to promise not to tell anyone else.

Were I to not leave, I would have to stay. For I would not have any other choice given the fact that one stays or one leaves. One can't do both. Were it possible to do both, then would happen?

[Natalie27]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required. <<

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.


:D 8)

I must sooooo backwards on this one but honest to God I have never once heard anyone use an inversion starting with "were". It just doesn't sound right. Someone said it's a formal way of speaking/writing???...but it's news to me. However I agree with Cassy that we use third conditional version starting with "Had/have...". That's very common.
Are you sure about the second conditional inversion????

Yes, I'm sure. It works in mixed conditional forms as well.

Here's a pdf document. I only use page two of this document. Take a look at page two, and see what Simon says. Simon says: http://www.longman.com/ae/incharge1/pdf/ic1_unit11.pdf

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...+for+this+*%22

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...mp;btnG=Search


8) 8) 8) :D

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.
Hats down to you X!!!!

[Casiopea]

[quote=X Mode]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required.

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.

:D 8)

Working together has its perks; notably, the opportunity to empower students with as much knowledge as we can muster. 8) Nice having you around, X-Mode.

All the best, :D

[Steven D]

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.

Yes, it's not a common form, but it does get used once in a while. It sounds formal and might have a tendency to sound screwbally, as you say, if used in what one could consider the wrong place or context.

[Steven D]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required.

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.

:D 8)

Working together has its perks; notably, the opportunity to empower students with as much knowledge as we can muster. 8) Nice having you around, X Mode.

All the best, :D

Thanks Casiopea. And all the best to you too.

8) :D

[Steven D]

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.

Yes, it's not a common form, but it does get used once in a while. It sounds formal and might have a tendency to sound screwbally, as you say, if used in what one could consider the wrong place or context.

It's not used often. However, if English is your first language, you might be able to call upon this form at anytime, without even giving it a thought, when you feel it would be appropriate to use. The problem lies in how to teach such uncommon forms and how to assimilate such forms into your language if you are learning English. It's a possibility. And as it is, it should not be overlooked. I believe in giving students everything they possibly can use.

I once spoke with someone that said he/she gives one or two lessons in his/her advanced class on conditionals. That's not enough. :x


:D 8)