[Grammar] "We always cook it, as if it is Mom's heart."

[sky3120]

"We always cook it, as if it is Mom's heart."

I saw the sentence at a restaurant and I felt scared. What do you native English speakers feel about it? Do you think "is" should change to "was" or the sentence does not make sense at all?

Thank you in advance.

 

[emsr2d2]

"We always cook it, as if it is Mom's heart."

I saw the sentence at a restaurant and I felt scared. What do you native English speakers feel about it? Do you think "is" should change to "was" or the sentence does not make sense at all?

Thank you in advance.

I think in the original language it was probably fine but it has clearly lost something in the translation. If it was written by a native speaker, then they have written a very poor statement. It doesn't matter whether it says "is" or "was" - it still sounds as if they are imagining that they are cooking their mother's heart when they cook the food they are going to serve you!

I hope they meant something like "Our mother always cooked from the heart ..." or "Our mother always put her heart and soul into her cooking ..." and the restaurant is saying that they still cook the same way.

 

[Raymott]

In any case, the comma is wrong if it's meant to say something about how they cook it.

 

[sky3120]

Thank you so much and I have a question for you. Is the structure of this sentence fine to use?

If it was written by a native speaker, then they have written a very poor statement.

I think that it should be

If it was /were written by a native speaker, then they would write a very poor statement.

or

If it had been written by a native speaker, then they would have written a very poor statement.

Or is there a reason you say the sentence that way and is there a meaning difference between them? Thank

you so much in advance.

 

[Barb_D]

Emsr2d2's original sentence is correct.

 

[bhaisahab]

If it was /were written by a native speaker, then they would write a very poor statement.



If it had been written by a native speaker, then they would have written a very poor statement.

These are completely wrong.