Normal grammatical order

[NewHope]

I'd like to know the normal grammatical order of "Were it left to me".

Context::
Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

=============================
But it has been surprisingly hard to pin down exactly how this nuclear reaction takes place.

Does "pin down" mean "limite"? Or should it mean "to explain clearly"?

 

[Steven D]

I'd like to know the normal grammatical order of "Were it left to me".

Context::

Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

=============================
But it has been surprisingly hard to pin down exactly how this nuclear reaction takes place.

Does "pin down" mean "limite"? Or should it mean "to explain clearly"?

were it left to me - This is normally "if it were left to me". It's possible to begin a second or third conditional sentence with "were". This could be considered an inversion. It's more formal. It's not something that is used often in English, but it is used. It has a more serious tone.

were + noun or noun phrase = if + noun or noun phrase + were

were + it = if it were


In your example sentence "pin down" means "define". I take "pin down" to mean "define". As Cambridge Dictionaries Online points out, "pin down" can also mean "discover exact details about something". I suppose if we discover exact details about something, then we can also say that we discover the definition of something.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=59985&dict=CALD

Dictionary.com has this to say about "pin down":

pin down

To fix or establish clearly: was finally able to pin down the cause of the disease.

pin down

Fix or establish clearly, as in The firefighters finally were able to pin down the source of the odor. [Mid-1900s]

Here, it would appear that Dictionary.com understands "pin down" as I do in your example sentence.

pin down

v 1: define clearly; "I cannot narrow down the rules for this game"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=8&q=pin+down

 

[NewHope]

Cool!

Thank you!

PS。 I didn't get "It's possible to begin a second or third conditional sentence with "were"" fully.

The sentence in the thread is a "second conditional sentence"? Or third?

 

[Steven D]

Cool!

Thank you!

PS。 I didn't get "It's possible to begin a second or third conditional sentence with "were"" fully.

The sentence in the thread is a "second conditional sentence"? Or third?

You're welcome.

Your example sentence in the thread is a second conditional. Its formal tone is marked not only by beginning the sentence with "were", but also by using "should" in the result clause. Normally, "would" is used.

Now, in order to understand the second and third conditional, I'll refer you to a link right here at UsingEnglish. I could explain it, but I think I'll save that work for when I write my own conditional sentence tutorial.

8) :shock: :idea:

https://www.usingenglish.com/articles/english-conditionals.html

Read the next section of this tutorial - The Zero Conditional
Other sections: Zero Conditional | First Conditional | Second Conditional | Third Conditional

https://www.usingenglish.com/articles/second-conditional.html

https://www.usingenglish.com/articles/third-conditional.html

https://www.usingenglish.com/articles/zero-conditional.html

https://www.usingenglish.com/articles/first-conditional.html

 

[NewHope]

Five links!

I'd read them carefully later.

Thank you.

 

[Steven D]

Five links!

I'd read them carefully later.

Thank you.

Hi,

I'll read them carefully later.

will - spontaneous decision to do something in the future

We don't use "would" in that manner for the future. We use "would" for possibilities we imagine in the present or the future, as well as other things of course.

If I had time, I'd read it now. I'd read it tomorrow morning, but I won't have time then either. It'll have to wait until tomorrow night.

would have + past participle - imaginary result for a completed action

I would've called you to say I'd be late if I had known there was going to be so much traffic.


1. I didn't call.

2. I didn't know there was going to be so much traffic.

 

[Casiopea]

I'd like to know the normal grammatical order of "Were it left to me".

Context::
Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

In addition, you could also try rephrasing the sentence, like this,

1. If it were left up to me...
2. If the decision to have a government without newspapers or to have newspapers without a government were left up to me, I should not hestitate a moment to prefer the latter. :wink:

Note that, If it were left up to me... means the same things as Were it left up to me.... There's also, If he had ~ Had he. By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required.

All the best,

 

[Steven D]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required. <<

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.


:shock: :idea: 8)

 

[Natalie27]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required. <<

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.


:shock: :idea: 8)

I must sooooo backwards on this one but honest to God I have never once heard anyone use an inversion starting with "were". It just doesn't sound right. Someone said it's a formal way of speaking/writing???...but it's news to me. However I agree with Cassy that we use third conditional version starting with "Had/have...". That's very common.
Are you sure about the second conditional inversion????

 

[Steven D]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required. <<

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.


:shock: :idea: 8)

I must sooooo backwards on this one but honest to God I have never once heard anyone use an inversion starting with "were". It just doesn't sound right. Someone said it's a formal way of speaking/writing???...but it's news to me. However I agree with Cassy that we use third conditional version starting with "Had/have...". That's very common.
Are you sure about the second conditional inversion????

Yes, I'm sure. It works in mixed conditional forms as well.

Here's a pdf document. I only use page two of this document. Take a look at page two, and see what Simon says. Simon says: http://www.longman.com/ae/incharge1/pdf/ic1_unit11.pdf

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q="Were+it+not+for+this+*"

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ght+have+been+able+to+go+outside"&btnG=Search


8) :shock: 8) :shock: 8) :idea:

 

[Steven D]

Were the book on the table, it wouldn't be where it is now.

Were I to tell you, you would have to promise not to tell anyone else.

Were I to not leave, I would have to stay. For I would not have any other choice given the fact that one stays or one leaves. One can't do both. Were it possible to do both, then would happen?

 

[Natalie27]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required. <<

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.


:shock: :idea: 8)

I must sooooo backwards on this one but honest to God I have never once heard anyone use an inversion starting with "were". It just doesn't sound right. Someone said it's a formal way of speaking/writing???...but it's news to me. However I agree with Cassy that we use third conditional version starting with "Had/have...". That's very common.
Are you sure about the second conditional inversion????

Yes, I'm sure. It works in mixed conditional forms as well.

Here's a pdf document. I only use page two of this document. Take a look at page two, and see what Simon says. Simon says: http://www.longman.com/ae/incharge1/pdf/ic1_unit11.pdf

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&q="Were+it+not+for+this+*"

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ght+have+been+able+to+go+outside"&btnG=Search


8) :shock: 8) :shock: 8) :idea:

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.
Hats down to you X!!!! :lol:

 

[Casiopea]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required.

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.

:shock: :idea: 8)

Working together has its perks; notably, the opportunity to empower students with as much knowledge as we can muster. 8) Nice having you around, X-Mode. :hi:

All the best,

 

[Steven D]

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.

Yes, it's not a common form, but it does get used once in a while. It sounds formal and might have a tendency to sound screwbally, as you say, if used in what one could consider the wrong place or context.

 

[Steven D]

By changing the word order (i.e., it were to were it; he had to had he), "If" is no longer required.

I should've remembered to include that in my post. It's good that you caught it.

:shock: :idea: 8)

Working together has its perks; notably, the opportunity to empower students with as much knowledge as we can muster. 8) Nice having you around, X Mode. :hi:

All the best,

Thanks Casiopea. And all the best to you too.

:hi: 8)

 

[Steven D]

Thanks. Live and learn for me, I guess. I have to tell you though that I have never heard anyone speak in that fashion. It sounds really screwbally to me.

Yes, it's not a common form, but it does get used once in a while. It sounds formal and might have a tendency to sound screwbally, as you say, if used in what one could consider the wrong place or context.

It's not used often. However, if English is your first language, you might be able to call upon this form at anytime, without even giving it a thought, when you feel it would be appropriate to use. The problem lies in how to teach such uncommon forms and how to assimilate such forms into your language if you are learning English. It's a possibility. And as it is, it should not be overlooked. I believe in giving students everything they possibly can use.

I once spoke with someone that said he/she gives one or two lessons in his/her advanced class on conditionals. That's not enough. :x


:shock: 8)