If you still are not sure, you had not been following

[nohabloingleas]

The author of the book "Grammar and Vocabulary for Cambridge Advanced and Proficiency" deems the sentence "If you still are not sure, you had not been following" grammatically incorrect, but I believe otherwise. Can't it function like a mixed conditional? As in someone had not been following something in the past and that is why he is still not sure.

 

[emsr2d2]

It's incorrect. It should be "... you have not been following". Only the present perfect works there.

If you are (right now) not sure, you have not been (in the past and continuing up to right now) following.

 

[jutfrank]

The word still is in an odd place. It should be:

If you're still not sure, you haven't been following.

 

[emsr2d2]

The word still is in an odd place. It should be:

If you're still not sure, you haven't been following.

Good spot. I missed that. I'd been happy with "If you still ..." if it was followed by "aren't sure".

 

[nohabloingleas]

It's incorrect. It should be "... you have not been following". Only the present perfect works there.

If you are (right now) not sure, you have not been (in the past and continuing up to right now) following.

Okay, so a sentence structure like that is just grammatically wrong?

 

[emsr2d2]

Okay, so a sentence structure like that is just grammatically wrong?

Yes, using "you had not been following" is incorrect in that sentence.

 

[nohabloingleas]

But are there any sentences where you can use if + present simple, past perfect continuous?

 

[emsr2d2]

If you were still not clear last Thursday, it would be obvious that you hadn't been following.

That makes it clear that the "not following" happened up to last Thursday, not to the present moment.

 

[jutfrank]

But are there any sentences where you can use if + present simple, past perfect continuous?

I'd say no. At least, it's extremely hard to think of a case where that could be justified.