MichaelLu2000
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2019
- Member Type
- English Teacher
- Native Language
- Chinese
- Home Country
- Taiwan
- Current Location
- Taiwan
I made up these sentences. This is not proofreading. I am just wondering if using "would be" and "were" are both valid in this context.
Example 1
“Few commanders in the 18th century ordered their soldiers to charge at the enemy right at the beginning of a battle. Flintlock rifles were much more efficient than older gunpowder weapons. If the soldiers charged directly at the enemy lines with bayonets, they were instantly killed by the enemy’s destructive firearms.”
Example 2
“Few commanders in the 18th century ordered their soldiers to charge at the enemy right at the beginning of a battle. Flintlock rifles were much more efficient than older gunpowder weapons. If the soldiers charged directly at the enemy lines with bayonets, they would be instantly killed by the enemy’s destructive firearms.”
My guess is that since it's a situation that, though not often, indeed took place in the 18th century, then both would be and were are fine, but I am not sure.
Example 1
“Few commanders in the 18th century ordered their soldiers to charge at the enemy right at the beginning of a battle. Flintlock rifles were much more efficient than older gunpowder weapons. If the soldiers charged directly at the enemy lines with bayonets, they were instantly killed by the enemy’s destructive firearms.”
Example 2
“Few commanders in the 18th century ordered their soldiers to charge at the enemy right at the beginning of a battle. Flintlock rifles were much more efficient than older gunpowder weapons. If the soldiers charged directly at the enemy lines with bayonets, they would be instantly killed by the enemy’s destructive firearms.”
My guess is that since it's a situation that, though not often, indeed took place in the 18th century, then both would be and were are fine, but I am not sure.
