[Grammar] What happens if ...?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Hi,

I have just heard in the news the presenter ask this way:

What happens if they get involved ...?

The question is a structure consisting of a main clause and a conditional clause. As the rule for such constructions prescribes a future tense in the main clause, the above question baffled me. Am I being to strict with grammar? What are your sentiments on this?

Hucky
 

probus

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I agree with you that strictly speaking grammar requires "What will happen if ..." or "What would happen if ...".

But "What happens if ..." has become so very common that it must now be considered standard usage in my opinion.

A google search for "what happens if" produces 33.9 million hits.
 
Last edited:

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Dear probus,

There seems to be some truth in what you write. Nevertheless, I´d be curious to learn which form you would personally prefer, quite apart from the millions upon millions in favour of the version I enquired about. Do you mean to say that the version in question in wrong, but since it is widely accepted, since it can´t be helped, it has to be tolerated? And what is more, do you refer your point of view just to that very specific formulation of "What happens if ..." as people have got used to it, or also in general to all such analogous structures allowing the present tense in the main clause?

If you find the time to reply, I´ll be / I am very glad.
(Whatever your answer, it won´t change my gladness.)

Hucky
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Dear Allornothing,

Indeed, there is no getting round grammar rules. Thanks!

Hucky
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
A google search for "what happens if" produces 33.9 million hits.
Don't use google to justify any claims about language. I have just googled 'ain't', and got eighty million hits. Other search engines gave between thirty and over two hundred million hits. There are millions of ain'ts floating around, but that does not mean that the word is acceptable in normal written English, or even, normally, in speech between reasonably educated speakers.

The corpora are better guides, though it is dangerous to use just the raw figures even with these. As a matter of interest, COCA gives 232 examples of 'what will happen if' and 952 for 'what happens if'. Some of the latter were like this:

What happens if you become dissatisfied with your registrar's service and want to switch providers?

In this example, one could argue that the writer was asking about a general situation rather than a future one, so will would not be appropriate. However most of the first fifty or so examples that I looked quickly through clearly referred to future times.

The results surprised me. At the moment I can think of nothing useful to add to the discussion.
 

Barb_D

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 12, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
But we use present for future all the time. Why should this be different?

Hurry up - the play starts in an hour.
We'll be there in plenty of time. Her plane lands at 8.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
But we use present for future all the time. Why should this be different?
I would have agreed with you before I saw the COCA figures. There are four times as many uses of the present simple for future time in this construction as of will. That's what surprises me.
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Dear Barb D,

Even if the usage of the present simple referring to the future should outnumber the will-future, this cannot be considered a relevant argument within the current debate (temporal/conditional clauses linked with main clauses - first conditional). The present simple is the proper tense for future actions according to timetable, which applies to both the example sentences you have quoted.

Slumber time starts soon (with reference to the future).
Good night!

Hucky
 

probus

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
Dear 5jj:

I take your point. I won't use google results as an argument in future.

Dear Hucky:

I repeat that I fully agree with your view of the grammar on this point. It has to be "What will happen if ...". But regrettably it no longer is, usually.

As you put it, "since it can´t be helped, it has to be tolerated." That is precisely what I meant. There are many common usages that cause me to grind my teeth, but there is nothing I or anyone can do about them.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
It has to be "What will happen if ...". But regrettably it no longer is, usually.
It's not really a question of 'it has to be'. If common usage is 'what will happen if', then that is what it can be.

There are at least five ways in English in expressing the futurity of these and one of these, as Barb pointed out, is the present simple.. There is no reason at all why it should not be used in temporal and condition clauses. My only surprise was at the discovery that it appears to be used much more frequently than will, at least with 'happen'

I then tried COCA on 'what will you do if' -28, and 'what do you do if' -115. While many of the latter examples were questions about general activities, some clearly referred to the future.

It seems that the present simple is used for future situations in temporal and conditional clauses rather more than I had assumed.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I take your point. I won't use google results as an argument in future.

I hope I didn't appear to be maligning google. I often wonder how I managed BG - before google. The point I should have made clear was that the number of hits does not tell us much about how an expression is used, or even if it's generally accepted. What google leads us to can be very helpful.

Sorry to go off topic, but I wanted to clarify that.
 

Barb_D

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 12, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
I surely do get tired of hearing all these "but unfortunately now..." and "regrettably, it now seems to be" and "sadly, now it's used..."

The English that was taught 200 years ago would sound odd to you -- agreed? So what is so magical about the way some of our members were taught 20, 30, or 50 years ago? That was the "right" English -- not the silly old-fashioned stuff and not this awful, new stuff? We're so darn special that whatever WE were taught is the right way and any furher evolution of the language is simply a sad indication of deterioriation instead of evoliution?

Please. 'Nuff said. I won't return to this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5jj

konungursvia

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
Don't use google to justify any claims about language. I have just googled 'ain't', and got eighty million hits. Other search engines gave between thirty and over two hundred million hits. There are millions of ain'ts floating around, but that does not mean that the word is acceptable in normal written English, or even, normally, in speech between reasonably educated speakers.

The corpora are better guides, though it is dangerous to use just the raw figures even with these. As a matter of interest, COCA gives 232 examples of 'what will happen if' and 952 for 'what happens if'. Some of the latter were like this:

What happens if you become dissatisfied with your registrar's service and want to switch providers?

In this example, one could argue that the writer was asking about a general situation rather than a future one, so will would not be appropriate. However most of the first fifty or so examples that I looked quickly through clearly referred to future times.

The results surprised me. At the moment I can think of nothing useful to add to the discussion.

Google can act as a corpus, used reasonably. I agree that a handful of hits won't prove anything, but millions may mean something.

As for "what happens if" I find it quite normal. Sports broadcasters like to use the formula to show a generalisation within the proposition, with the added meaning of "generally" or "usually", as though one can extrapolate future outcomes from a single observation.
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Dear probus,

Thanks a lot for your reply. I will content with what you say and - willy-nilly - put up with the situation. Although there is more on my mind to comment on the matter, I`m afraid, I have to restrict myself tonight simply to these few lines. Yet, I am sure there will be more phenomena in store for us that will lead us back to that point sooner or later. For the time being, all the best!

Hucky
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Dear fivejedjon,

If you please, I´d like to hear what the situation concerning our issue is like on the British Isles. And may I ignorantly and, thus, humbly (with cap in hand) ask you what COCA stands for and what it is? Could you please put an end to my firmly rooted ignorance? (Ignorance is not always bliss.) Thanks in advance!

Hucky
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
And may I ignorantly and, thus, humbly (with cap in hand) ask you what COCA stands for and what it is?
Hover over COCA and the truth is revealed.
 
Last edited:

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Hover over COCA and the truth is revealed.

I would not have asked you unless I had exactly done this. (I had even tried to find the answer to the question via more channels.) By the way, I have almost any relevant source on whatever aspect of the English language at my disposal at home to be consulted. But that does not make up for the competence of a linguistically educated native speaker. That is why I have never asked about (and will never ask about) grammar or other rules, but about the present state of affairs and the respective points of views on it. What is more, my questions never imply any evaluation or judgement, but reflect merely my neutral interest in the latest developments of the English language. Besides, there is not the slightest doubt that there are temporal clause constructions with a present simple in the main clause referring to a generalized present action. This is the so called zero-conditional. But this is not what I was driving at. My original example clearly refers to the future and to nothing else but the future: The presenter asked an expert on foreign affairs about what he thought would happen in Libya in case of a NATO attack. This is no stuff like: What happens when you attack Libya? - Whenever /every time we attack Libya, some of our machines get shot down.

P.S. It might be interesting to learn that the renowned Cambridge Grammar based on enormous statistical material puts the will-future in the first place in terms of the frequency of usage among all the structures referring to the future. I do not feel like verifying it now - I could easily if needs be - but off the cuff I reckon there are at least 10 constructions in English to express the future.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I would not have asked you unless I had exactly done this.
I assumed that you asked because you had not done this.
Besides, there is not the slightest doubt that there are temporal clause constructions with a present simple in the main clause referring to a generalized present action. This is the so called zero-conditional.
There are also constructions with will in one or both clauses that could be interpreted as zero conditionals:

If you heat ice, it will melt.
If you will drink so much, of course you'll have a hangover.
off the cuff I reckon there are at least 10 constructions in English to express the future.
Well, there are nine if you just start with the core modals. When I mentioned (at least) five, I was referring to the five English constructions that are normally used to express what in some other languages may be expressed with a future tense: present simple, present progressive/continuous, BE + going to, will + bare infinitive and will + progressive infinitive.
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
I surely do get tired of hearing all these "but unfortunately now..." and "regrettably, it now seems to be" and "sadly, now it's used..."

The English that was taught 200 years ago would sound odd to you -- agreed? So what is so magical about the way some of our members were taught 20, 30, or 50 years ago? That was the "right" English -- not the silly old-fashioned stuff and not this awful, new stuff? We're so darn special that whatever WE were taught is the right way and any furher evolution of the language is simply a sad indication of deterioriation instead of evoliution?

Please. 'Nuff said. I won't return to this thread.


Dear Barb_D,

Although you might not read this anymore – as you announced not to return – I cannot leave your lines unanswered, even if I can do so in no more than a nutshell. What is more, I am none of your adressees as I cannot be counted among those linguistic defeatists or alarmists. I tried to find out whom you could have had in mind by reading the previous messages again. But I failed to identify someone who this characterization could apply to. Anyway, even if that had been the case, I deem it just a question of individual taste, liking, or preference, and thus of personal freedom to regret or to welcome whatever development, not just in the sphere of language. No one is compelled to share that same point.


What I do regret, however, is that your main paragraph is based on a false assumption. As far as I can see no one in this thread has puffed up himself as an absolute authority claiming that “his” English (what a strange concept of language!) is the “right” one (as you put it). And fortunately human beings are not mere products of their respective time, but are capable of transcending it. (Notwithstanding this ability the undeniable phenomenon of narrow-mindedness does exist.)


Moreover, the time span of a few decades that you mentioned is relatively irrelevant in terms of the intrinsic development of a language. Talking about development, it is just a platitude, a mere commonplace to state that everything is subject to development. What on earth is not? Who denies that?



Besides, the concept of development is neutral about the level reached during this process. It does not logically imply the idea of an upward movement in terms of improvement and advancement. Any development is principally open to rise and fall, and may turn out to be a downturn or decline. So it is wrong to suppose that everything that has surfaced is in itself better or higher than previous stages of development. Taking that into consideration, it is recommendable to adopt a twofold attitude towards any development – a positive, yet not uncritical stand. The responsibility of man demands to foster cultural achievements – one of the most valuable of them is language.

Hucky
 

Hucky

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
German
Home Country
Switzerland
Current Location
Switzerland
Google can act as a corpus, used reasonably. I agree that a handful of hits won't prove anything, but millions may mean something.

As for "what happens if" I find it quite normal. Sports broadcasters like to use the formula to show a generalisation within the proposition, with the added meaning of "generally" or "usually", as though one can extrapolate future outcomes from a single observation.

Dear konungursvia,

I do go along with your first paragraph in saying that it means something (i.e. not nothing), but not everything. No need to point out the enormous number of partly horrifying blunders (to put it mildly) in linguistic (and factual) terms on websites.



As to the example mentioned in your second paragraph: Don´t you think that – although this kind of action is related to an unforeseeable outcome of an action in the future – it is still treated like a generalization, and has thus to be considered a zero conditional?


May I add a question about the way you couched one statement? You wrote: “… broadcasters like to use …” Why didn´t you take the gerund after the verb to like?


Looking forward to learning from you about that.

Hucky
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top