[Grammar] I'm going to the concert if I can get a ticket.

[beachboy]

I'm going to the concert if I can get a ticket

This sentence appears in Murphys's Basic Grammar in Use. I see that most first conditional sentences use will rather than going to. What's the rule to know whether to use one or the other? Would there be a difference between the sentence above and "Ill go to the concert if I can get a ticket"?

 

[Rover_KE]

To me, I'm going to the concert if I can get a ticket implies certainty; I'll go to the concert if I can get a ticket ​implies willingness.

 

[beachboy]

To me, I'm going to the concert if I can get a ticket implies certainty; I'll go to the concert if I can get a ticket ​implies willingness.

Off-hand, would you say that this certainty/willingness rule applies to most of the first conditional sentences? Could you come up with a sentence in which "going to" wouldn't be possible?

 

[GoesStation]

"Are you going to the concert?"
"I will if I can find a babysitter!"

In this dialog, I'm going to would be very unlikely.

 

[Tdol]

Could you come up with a sentence in which "going to" wouldn't be possible?

If you said I will go as a promise, with stress on will, I don't think the same meaning could be conveyed with going to.

 

[emsr2d2]

"Are you going to the concert?"
"I will if I can find a babysitter!"

In this dialog, I'm going to would be very unlikely.

Whilst I agree that "I'm going to" would be very unlikely, my response to that question would be "I am if I can find a babysitter!" That would be a shorter version of "I am going" but I admit that I am at a loss to explain why I'd use "I am", effectively meaning "I am going" but not "I'm going".

 

[jutfrank]

I am at a loss to explain why I'd use "I am", effectively meaning "I am going" but not "I'm going".

When emphasising, it's quite normal to stress the auxiliary verb (am) in this way. I agree that that I am is the most likely response here as it echoes the grammar of the question.

When trying to discriminate different uses of future forms, it's a good idea to think of present continuous as a way to talk about arrangements. One of the problems with the sentence here (and in my opinion one of the major flaws of Murphy's book) is that the example sentence is inauthentic (it's just made-up) and uncontextualised (an isolated sentence) so it's really not very useful for analysing the way we choose future forms.

 

[beachboy]

When emphasising, it's quite normal to stress the auxiliary verb (am) in this way. I agree that that I am is the most likely response here as it echoes the grammar of the question.

When trying to discriminate different uses of future forms, it's a good idea to think of present continuous as a way to talk about arrangements. One of the problems with the sentence here (and in my opinion one of the major flaws of Murphy's book) is that the example sentence is inauthentic (it's just made-up) and uncontextualised (an isolated sentence) so it's really not very useful for analysing the way we choose future forms.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

If my 2 siblings and I have arranged to visit our parents who live in another city next weekend but we depend on somebody lending us a car, then I can say to a friend "We're visiting our parents next weekend if we get a car" (or even "We'll be visiting our parents next weekend if we get a car") rather than "We'll visit our parents next weekend if we get a car". Something like this?

 

[jutfrank]

If my 2 siblings and I have arranged to visit our parents who live in another city next weekend but we depend on somebody lending us a car, then I can say to a friend "We're visiting our parents next weekend if we get a car"

Yes.