Conditionals

[Tdol]

Does it change the meaning?

 

[dduck]

Just curious, do Americans use this construction:

Should you want it, I'll have it ready for you.

I missvoted. This is the first conditional.

Does it change the meaning? Not sure, I never use this construction.

Iain

 

[RonBee]

Question: In which conditional can 'if' be replaced with 'should'?
Answer: Well, it's not the zero conditional. However, while you can't use should with the zero conditional, you can use when. (You can also make a zero conditional statement using either should or when.)

Examples:

• If you heat water to 100 degrees Celsius, it boils.
  When you heat water to 100 degrees Celsius, it boils.
  Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius.

What do you think?



[Edited for spelling.]

 

[Tdol]

Some people argue that the zero conditional isn't a true conditional because 'when' can be used in place of 'if'.

In BE, we do replace 'if' with 'should' in the first conditional and it seems to reduce the probability of the condition being met, like a halfway house to the second conditional. ;-)

 

[RonBee]

Some people argue that the zero conditional isn't a true conditional because 'when' can be used in place of 'if'.

But it is, isn't it? After all, a specified condition must be met before a specified result can occur. (If the water does not reach 100 degrees Celsius it does not boil.) BTW, I meant to ask (but forgot to) is why is it called a zero conditional?

In BE, we do replace 'if' with 'should' in the first conditional and it seems to reduce the probability of the condition being met, like a halfway house to the second conditional. ;-)

It's interesting that you said that. I was considering disagreeing with myself. How about:

• Should water reach 100 degrees Celsius it will boil. (If it doesn't it won't, but should it do so it will.)

What do you think?

 

[Tdol]

Should water reach 100 degrees Celsius it will boil. (If it doesn't it won't, but should it do so it will.)


That takes it into the first conditional. It's called the zero conditional, I believe, because the link is automatic. ;-)

 

[RonBee]

No should for the zero conditional then. I will just have to agree with myself.

:wink:

 

[Tdol]

It sounds like a good idea. ;-)

 

[whl626]

No should for the zero conditional then. I will just have to agree with myself.

:wink:

I have come across ' should ' being added for a matter of probability.

eg We will not go if it rains. Or We will not go if it should rain.

 

[Tdol]

That's fine, but you would find it hard to do that in a zero conditional as they express certainty not probability. ;-))

 

[RonBee]

No should for the zero conditional then. I will just have to agree with myself.

:wink:

I have come across ' should ' being added for a matter of probability.

eg We will not go if it rains. Or We will not go if it should rain.

That's a first conditional.

• First Conditional
  https://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/1st-conditional.html

(I looked it up just to be sure.)

:wink:

 

[devrim55]

I do not understand why you argue about this!
İt is very clear and certain that 'should'is used to omit 'if' in first conditionals.

 

[LUPITA]

hello there,

I think you can replace if by should or what it is the same ommit "if" when you are using an unreal conditional which answers "what would happen if...?
related to inversion. particularly in formal or literary English.
but only in hypothetical conditionals so the second conditional...:-D :-D :-D

 

[Tdol]

Should he come, I'll give him the message. ;-)

 

[SunnyDay]

Couldn't you also say, "If he comes, I'll give him the message."? Means the same thing to me.

 

[Tdol]

Yes, you can. This is the form where 'if' can be replaced with 'should', which is the topic of the thread. ;-)

 

[besthost]

Couldn't you also say, "If he comes, I'll give him the message."? Means the same thing to me.

So, doesn't matter if you use "if" or "should", the meaning stays the same, is that right?

Or maybe there's a tiny difference, e.g. Is furnishing a conditional with "should" more formal?

 

[Tdol]

It is seen more in formal usage. Also, it can be used to reduce the possiblity- should he come = can be used to mean 'I don't really expect him to come, but...'.

 

[Teia]

First conditional.
In my opinion, the meaning is a little different from the sentence in which we use "if"; the idea or the request is much more stressed

Should you have any information about the missing girl, call the nearest police station.

It does not matter how much information you have : any information is welcome or would be of help.

 

[Dr. Jamshid Ibrahim]

Yes, you can. This is the form where 'if' can be replaced with 'should', which is the topic of the thread. ;-)

1. So Tdol to put them on a scale of possibility and probability:
- Should replaced with if (zero to first conditional: increases possibility)
Should takes it into the first conditional. It's called the zero conditional as they express certainty not probability.
- If replaced with should (decreases probability: first to second conditional)
In BE, we do replace 'if' with 'should' in the first conditional and it seems to reduce the probability of the condition being met, like a halfway house to the second conditional.

2. So In all cases should functions as a border crossing from zero conditional to first conditional and then again from first conditional to second conditional.

3. BTW when is not conditional at all because it doesn’t set a condition. It refers to time: “When he comes” means I know he comes but I don’t know the time whereas “if he comes” means I don’t know.

4.What about provided that and given..