If clause 1,2 and 3

[FalaGringo]

Now i'm not the best when it comes to grammar terminology but I've been analysing the way in which we write and speak English on a day to day basis in order to teach Portuguese speakers as I've been learning Portuguese for about 4 years now, that being said it's important for me to identify my own mistakes in English as well as the mistakes of others because the more I know about my own language, the better I get at theirs.

You may or may not have noticed but I tend to find that English speakers favour the simple past over the past perfect.

Let's look at some examples...

Examples with the "Past perfect" - if Clause 3
"If I had spoken to him, you would have known about it."
"If I had had a Harry potter book, I would have read all of it by now."

Examples using the "Past simple" - if clause 2
"If I spoke to him, you would have known about it."
"If I had a Harry potter book, I would have read all of it by know."

Now I believe it is much more common for English speakers to use if clause 2 more than 3, I can't identify any difference in meaning when using either of the clauses.

Let's look at the if clauses while using the verb "To be"...

If clause 2 (To be)
"If I were there I would have stopped the fight immediately."

If clause 3 (To be)
"If I had been there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

Common error
"if I was there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

I believe this to be a common mistake but I may be wrong, I even catch myself using "Was" instead of "Were" when it is required, I blame that on music.

If clause 1 is very simple to understand but I do think we tend to yet again make mistakes when using the verb"To be"

Examples...
"If the power were to be turned off, the nuclear plant would explode"
(it seems pretty accurate to me)

"If the power was turned off, the nuclear plant would explode"
(I feel as if "was" is yet again incorrect here but it is commonly used"

Let me know what you think about my analysis, am I wrong?, am I right? or do I still need to relearn my mother tongue?

 

[tedmc]

Do you know the third conditional?

 

[teechar]

Now I'm not the best when it comes to grammar terminology, but I've been analysing the way in which we write and speak English on a day-to-day basis in order to teach Portuguese speakers, as I've been learning Portuguese for about 4 years now. That being said, it's important for me to identify my own mistakes in English as well as the mistakes of others because the more I know about my own language, the better I get at theirs.

You may or may not have noticed, but I tend to find that English speakers favour the simple past over the past perfect.

Let's look at some examples.

Examples with the "Past perfect" - if Clause 3
"If I had spoken to him, you would have known about it."
"If I had had a Harry potter book, I would have read all of it by now."

Examples using the "Past simple" - if clause 2
"If I spoke to him, you would have known about it."
"If I had a Harry potter book, I would have read all of it by know."

Now I believe it is much more common for English speakers to use if clause 2 more than 3. I can't identify any difference in meaning when using either of the clauses.

No. Teach your students to use the former. In the second example, you can teach them to use "If I'd had ...", especially in speech.
Mixed conditionals do exist, and people do use them, but I see no reason for not using the standard third conditional in the above.

Let's look at the if clauses [STRIKE]while using[/STRIKE] with the verb "To be"...

If clause 2 (To be)
"If I were there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

If clause 3 (To be)
"If I had been there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

Common error
"if I was there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

I believe this to be a common mistake but I may be wrong. I even catch myself using "was" instead of "were" when it is required. I blame that on music.

If clause 1 is very simple to understand, but I do think we tend to yet again make mistakes when using the verb "to be".

Examples.
"If the power were to be turned off, the nuclear plant would explode".
(it seems pretty accurate to me)

"If the power was turned off, the nuclear plant would explode".
(I feel as if "was" is yet again incorrect here, but it is commonly used".

Let me know what you think about my analysis. Am I wrong? Am I right? Or do I still need to relearn my mother tongue?

Read up on the use of the subjunctive mood. For example, take a look at this link:
https://ell.stackexchange.com/quest...ference-between-conditionals-subjunctive-mood

Note also the comma splice errors in your post. I have corrected them in blue.

 

[jutfrank]

Now I believe it is much more common for English speakers to use if clause 2 more than 3

I don't agree with that at all.

I can't identify any difference in meaning when using either of the clauses.

There is a difference in meaning. The past simple form would express a real (not unreal) past. Imagine someone with amnesia who doesn't know whether she did in fact speak to him or not.

Common error
"if I was there, I would have stopped the fight immediately."

I believe this to be a common mistake but I may be wrong, I even catch myself using "Was" instead of "Were" when it is required, I blame that on music.

Yes, but were is also wrong, strictly speaking. The correct form is had been.

"If the power were to be turned off, the nuclear plant would explode"
(it seems pretty accurate to me)

Yes, that's correct.

"If the power was turned off, the nuclear plant would explode"
(I feel as if "was" is yet again incorrect here but it is commonly used"

In this case, was is very likely to be used, but again, very strictly speaking, the correct form is the subjunctive were. In cases like this, the average teacher will be happy for a learner to use was, however, since it is so common among natives.

 

[5jj]

You might be interested in the series of articles on conditionals beginning here, FalaGringo.