# if I were you/if I was you



## PERRICHE

Please, can anyone tell me which one is correct?

If I were you, I would dump her
If I was you, I would dump her

Si fuese como en español, debería ser "If *I was* you" (Si *yo fuese* tú), es decir, primera persona del pretérito imperfecto de subjuntivo del verbo ser, para concordar con el sujeto (yo).


----------



## donbill

If I were you, I would dump her. (More conversational: If I were you, I'd dump her.)

A lot of people say "If I was you," but if I were you, Perriche, I wouldn't say it!

un saludo


----------



## Thank you

I found a similar question on "Antimoon.com."  (Before I checked, I was going to tell you that you must use "were" in proper writing and speech.  I think I heard that "was" may be becoming more acceptable, but it truly sounds incorrect to my ears.  The subjunctive form (were) is correct here, and many people do still use this...myself included.)  

Here's a part of the thread I read:

No, "if I was you" is most definitely NOT acceptable from a strictly  grammatical point of view. It may be commonly used in colloquial English  but in written English, it is a mark of poor grammar.

On the American SATII Writing test (which will become part of the SAT I  next year), "if I was you" would cost you dear points! The College  Entrance Exam Board is extremely picky about this particular grammatical  concept.


----------



## rebelde201

I hear the second one much more often, but the first one is the correct one.

I think in English, the subjunctive isn't as used as much as in any other languages, like Spanish.  I know I have never discussed subjunctive in any of my high school or college English classes.

And whenever I hear people say the second version, I always cringe because I know that's not correct, but it's accepted.


----------



## plsdeluno

rebelde201 said:


> I hear the second one much more often, but the first one is the correct one.
> 
> I think in English, the subjunctive isn't as used as much as in any other languages, like Spanish. I know I have never discussed subjunctive in any of my high school or college English classes.
> 
> And whenever I hear people say the second version, I always cringe because I know that's not correct, but it's accepted.


 
Yes i agree, perfectly explained and true.


----------



## duvija

Opinion vs statistics. Guess which one wins?


----------



## PERRICHE

That was a lot of useful information. 

If I were you, guys  , I'd start smacking all those who speak lousy on the back of their heads. (But sorry if I made mistakes in this sentence) 

Thanks everyone!


----------



## Spug

Thank you said:


> On the American SATII Writing test (which will become part of the SAT I  next year), "if I was you" would cost you dear points! The College  Entrance Exam Board is extremely picky about this particular grammatical  concept.



I, for one, am quite happy to hear that. 

Like one of the previous posters, I cringe when I hear "If I was you..." Even though these contrary-to-fact constructions with "if" are among the few examples of the use of the subjunctive in modern English, using "was" in them just sounds awful to old geezers like me.

Saludos a todos...


----------



## zetem

Consider the following two statements, one with "were" and the other with "was".

(1) "If I WERE you I should get more rest." The situation is impossible (unreal) since the speaker can never be the other person. This statement is a form of advice to the other person and means, "You should get more rest". By the way, note that "should" is used in BE, and would in AE. 

(1) "If he WAS there I would have seen him." The first clause is real because of the use of "was". It is possible that the other person was there. The second clause is unreal since it uses the construction "would have". By using the the construction for unreal statements the speaker wants to say that he does not believe that the other person was there. The situation is unreal in his mind, but he allows the posibility that he could be wrong.

Now you should be able to see why you cannot use "was" in the statement "If I ... you". With WAS you would imply that it is possible for you to be him.


----------



## plsdeluno

zetem said:


> Consider the following two statements, one with "were" and the other with "was".
> 
> (1) "If I WERE you I should get more rest." The situation is impossible (unreal) since the speaker can never be the other person. This statement is a form of advice to the other person and means, "You should get more rest". By the way, note that "should" is used in BE, and would in AE.
> 
> (1) "If he WAS there I would have seen him." The first clause is real because of the use of "was". It is possible that the other person was there. The second clause is unreal since it uses the construction "would have". By using the the construction for unreal statements the speaker wants to say that he does not believe that the other person was there. The situation is unreal in his mind, but he allows the posibility that he could be wrong.
> 
> Now you should be able to see why you cannot use "was" in the statement "If I ... you". With WAS you would imply that it is possible for you to be him.


 
I would definatly say :if i were you, i would get more rest: I have not seen :should: used in this way, perhaps in Canada but not in England.


----------



## inib

plsdeluno said:


> I would definatly say :if i were you, i would get more rest: I have not seen :should: used in this way, perhaps in Canada but not in England.


 I HAVE heard "should" used in this way, to indicate the first person conditional, with no suggestion of obligation or even advice. And I've heard it in England, though I'll admit it is used less and less frequently and may sound more formal or more old-fashioned than "would".
Be careful with your spelling and punctuation. You'll have the moderators after you!


----------



## zetem

Perhaps I should add one more point to explain myself. Because of widespread influence of American culture through the media and the entertainment industry, it does not take long (maybe a few years) before the American way of talking becomes common and "acceptable" in GB. I believe that most questions about the grammar on this forum come from students of English, who, in order to pass an exam, must give answers acceptable to their teachers. And the teachers teach the grammar that can be found in grammar books, perhaps the same grammar books I use, and not "the grammar" one can here in McDonald's, pubs and similar places.


----------



## PERRICHE

zetem said:


> Consider the following two statements, one with "were" and the other with "was".
> 
> (1) "If I WERE you I should get more rest." The situation is impossible (unreal) since the speaker can never be the other person. This statement is a form of advice to the other person and means, "You should get more rest". By the way, note that "should" is used in BE, and would in AE.
> 
> (1) "If he WAS there I would have seen him." The first clause is real because of the use of "was". It is possible that the other person was there. The second clause is unreal since it uses the construction "would have". By using the the construction for unreal statements the speaker wants to say that he does not believe that the other person was there. The situation is unreal in his mind, but he allows the posibility that he could be wrong.
> 
> Now you should be able to see why you cannot use "was" in the statement "If I ... you". With WAS you would imply that it is possible for you to be him.



Excellent explanation. 

By the way, the same happens with Spanish. La gente cada vez habla peor aquí...


----------



## donbill

Dear Zetem,

I want you to know that not all of us Americans talk lousy! Some of us talk plumb good, even if we do go to McDonald's reg'lar.  (Amigos hispanoblantes: ni digan ni escriban esas oraciones.)

Pero, en serio, el inglés correcto de EE UU es tan correcto como el del Canadá, que es tan correcto como el de Inglaterra, que es tan correcto como el de Australia, etc. Cada país tiene su cultura popular, y la cultura popular nunca dejará de influir en el lenguaje.


----------



## PERRICHE

zetem said:


> Perhaps I should add one more point to explain myself. Because of widespread influence of American culture through the media and the entertainment industry, it does not take long (maybe a few years) before the American way of talking becomes common and "acceptable" in GB. I believe that most questions about the grammar on this forum come from students of English, who, in order to pass an exam, must give answers acceptable to their teachers. And the teachers teach the grammar that can be found in grammar books, perhaps the same grammar books I use, and not "the grammar" one can here in McDonald's, pubs and similar places.



Ok, now I know that I have to use _were _if the Direct Object is something impossible. _If I *were *Elvis Presley, I would play grunge nowadays ..._

But I guess it would be correct to say _If I *was *a singer, I would sing as Elvis_ , since I still have a chance in my life to become a singer 

Am I wrong?


----------



## donbill

PERRICHE said:


> Ok, now I know that I have to use _were _if the Direct Object is something impossible. _If I *were *Elvis Presley, I would play grunge nowadays ..._
> 
> But I guess it would be correct to say _If I *was *a singer, I would sing as Elvis_ , since I still have a chance in my life to become a singer
> 
> Am I wrong?



You're still not a singer. You're still expressing something that is contrary to reality. You still have to say "If I were a singer, I would sing like Elvis."


----------



## donbill

Perriche, consider this ridiculously contrived context:

Bob: Hey, John, I saw you at the party last night.

John: Impossible! I didn't go to the party.

Bob: Yes, you did! I saw you there.

John: Well, if I WAS there, I certainly don't remember it!


----------



## PERRICHE

donbill said:


> Perriche, consider this ridiculously contrived context:
> 
> Bob: Hey, John, I saw you at the party last night.
> 
> John: Impossible! I didn't go to the party.
> 
> Bob: Yes, you did! I saw you there.
> 
> John: Well, if I WAS there, I certainly don't remember it!



All right, donbill:

So there's no way to say _If I was... _when the second part of the sentence has the particle _would. _Right?


----------



## donbill

PERRICHE said:


> All right, donbill:
> 
> So there's no way to say _If I was... _when the second part of the sentence has the particle _would. _Right?



Without consulting a manual, I'd say such is rare but not unheard of. But consider this, another contrived and ridiculous context:

*"If I was a singer in a previous life--and it's quite possible that I was--I would sing like Elvis."* _If I was a singer_ doesn't rule out the possibility of your having been one. If _I were a singer_ effectively rules out, eliminates, the possibility.

The whole issue of the hypothetical and contrary-to-reality constructions is tricky.

Consider: 

a. If it snows tomorrow, I'll go to the mountains and ski. (not ruled out.)
b. If it should snow tomorrow/If it were to snow tomorrow, I'd go to the mountains and ski. (not likely, hypothetical)
c. If it snowed tomorrow, you know what I'd do? I'd go to the mountains and ski. (not likely) 

Some linguists describe example "c" as the "non-systemic" use of the past; that is, a past tense verb in a present or future context indicates the unreal or hypothetical. For most verbs in English, the past tense to express either reality or hypothesis looks the same. That is not true for the verb *to be* because we have to make the *was/were* contrast.

Two more:

If I studied everyday as much as that guy does, I'd pass all of my exams. (I'm telling you that I don't)
If I studied all day tomorrow, I still wouldn't pass the exam. (I'm telling you that I probably won't do it.)

In both cases in Spanish, we'd use si estudiara/estudiase.

Es interesante, ¿no?


----------



## PERRICHE

donbill said:


> Without consulting a manual, I'd say such is rare but not unheard of. But consider this, another contrived and ridiculous context:
> 
> *"If I was a singer in a previous life--and it's quite possible that I was--I would sing like Elvis."* _If I was a singer_ doesn't rule out the possibility of your having been one. If _I were a singer_ effectively rules out, eliminates, the possibility.
> 
> The whole issue of the hypothetical and contrary-to-reality constructions is tricky.
> 
> Consider:
> 
> a. If it snows tomorrow, I'll go to the mountains and ski. (not ruled out.)
> b. If it should snow tomorrow/If it were to snow tomorrow, I'd go to the mountains and ski. (not likely, hypothetical)
> c. If it snowed tomorrow, you know what I'd do? I'd go to the mountains and ski. (not likely)
> 
> Some linguists describe example "c" as the "non-systemic" use of the past; that is, a past tense verb in a present or future context indicates the unreal or hypothetical. For most verbs in English, the past tense to express either reality or hypothesis looks the same. That is not true for the verb *to be* because we have to make the *was/were* contrast.
> 
> Two more:
> 
> If I studied everyday as much as that guy does, I'd pass all of my exams. (I'm telling you that I don't)
> If I studied all day tomorrow, I still wouldn't pass the exam. (I'm telling you that I probably won't do it.)
> 
> In both cases in Spanish, we'd use si estudiara/estudiase.
> 
> Es interesante, ¿no?



Es interesante, por supuesto. Pero una comedura de cabeza, sin duda.
El tema está en eso del verbo _to be, _que es el único verbo en inglés donde su forma en tiempo pasado cambia, dependiendo del sujeto.


----------



## Istriano

Same people who hate_ If I was you_, are fine with_ I wish I was._
At least be consistent and say: I wish I were, I wish she were here etc.
if you are fond of subjunctive and defend_ If I were you. _

Furthermore, use
_It looks as if it were going to rain_ and not
_It looks like it's gonna rain_.


----------



## donbill

Istriano said:


> Same people who hate_ If I was you_, are fine with_ I wish I was._
> At least be consistent and say: I wish I were, I wish she were here etc.
> if you are fond of subjunctive and defend_ If I were you. _
> 
> Furthermore, use
> _It looks as if it were going to rain_ and not
> _It looks like it's gonna rain_.



I promise to defend the subjunctive with enthusiasm, but I'll say "It looks like it's gonna rain" if I think that's what it's gonna do!


----------



## donbill

Istriano said:


> Same people who hate_ If I was you_, are fine with_ I wish I was._
> At least be consistent and say: I wish I were, I wish she were here etc.
> if you are fond of subjunctive and defend_ If I were you. _
> 
> Furthermore, use
> _It looks as if it were going to rain_ and not
> _It looks like it's gonna rain_.



Istriano, I just can't resist making just one more comment. Here's my context:

If I were with a group of friends, and if we were to notice that the sky was cloudy, and if we were to sense a certain degree of humidity in the air, and if thunder were rumbling in the distance, and if I were to say to my friends, "It looks as if it were going to rain," they would say to me, "donbill, you talk as if you were a grammar book and not a native speaker of idiomatic American English! Why don't you just say, "It looks like it's going to rain?"


----------



## zetem

The construction "If I were ... you" is idiomatic, and applies only to the present time. Apparently ""was" is common in conversations, but "were" is still the only acceptable choice in the halls of power. It has a unique meaning: it is an advice or a suggestion to the other person to do something. 

Any other possible construction of the type "If I were ..." has a completely different meaning. For example: "If I were a rich man, I would ..." only says that I am not rich now (present tense), but it does not say anything about my past or my future. Who knows, I may be rich one day. The statement expresses my wish, which, because it is a wish, is not real now.

You cannot use "if I were" for past unreal events. For that, you must use "If I had been ... (but I wasn't).


----------



## Spug

Istriano said:


> Same people who hate_ If I was you_, are fine with_ I wish I was._
> At least be consistent and say: I wish I were, I wish she were here etc.



Sorry, but in my experience, that's simply wrong.

People who are observant enough to say "If I were you" are also observant enough to say "I wish I were." By the same logic, those who say "If I was you" also tend to say "I wish I was."

Un saludo...


----------



## matthews028

If I was a singer in a previous life--and it's quite possible that I was--I *probably sung* like Elvis.

It's incorrect to say "If I was" followed by "would" in the "podría/haría/diría" sense (maybe not in the "podía/hacía/decía sense though.)


----------



## donbill

matthews028 said:


> If I was a singer in a previous life--and it's quite possible that I was--I *probably sung* like Elvis.
> 
> It's incorrect to say "If I was" followed by "would" in the "podría/haría/diría" sense (maybe not in the "podía/hacía/decía sense though.)



If I was a singer in a previous life--and I probably was, based on my recollection of experiences!--I would quite naturally sing like Elvis in this life and, in fact, I do.

I don't find that to be incorrect. Improbable, but not incorrect.

Anyway, I think we've just about exhausted this thread. If I were to say anything else, I doubt that it would make much sense.


----------



## Istriano

At least it's easier than in Spanish:

Si (fuese, fuera, sería) // entonces (sería, fuera, fuese)

9 combinations possible (of course some of them are overly formal
or dialectal).


----------



## dianamadrid45

*Atención - Unión de hilos*
​
I am new at trying to explain and understand English grammar. My question is why is it:

If I *were* you, I would go to bed early tonight.

and not

If I *was* you, I would go to bed early tonight.

Since the form calls for If+past simple+would+inf.
Thanks,
Diana.


----------



## kreiner

A lo mejor este hilo te puede ayudar:
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1970322&highlight=if+i+were+you


----------



## tuvir

If I were you es lo correcto en la condicional de tipo 2 y se pone were en todas las personas . If I was you puede ser en sentido coloquial, en inglés hablado. o sea, fuera o fuese= were. I hope it helps


----------



## Corintio44

Dianamadrid45:

The thing is that "If I *were* you" uses subjunctive in this case. A lot native English-speakers use "If I was" instead of "If I were," but I prefer "If I *were*." Some people think "If I *were*" sounds pretentious. Often, correct grammar sounds pretentious to certain people. For example, "I haven't *swum* in a long time" or "I haven't *drunk* alcohol in a long time." It's more common to hear "I haven't *swam*" or "I haven't *drank*" even though the past participle is required: *swum/drunk*.

Subjunctive isn't used very much in English, but it is still very common in certain constructs. 

There are many constructs that are archaic in common speech, but are still used because they are idiomatic. Here are some examples:

What say you? (to the jury)
With this ring, I *thee* wed.
Need I say more?

Like in Spanish:

*Érase* una vez.
El sapo a la sapa *tiénela* por guapa.


----------

