# If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner (conditional clause)



## kan3malato

Morning, all
In your opinion is  this sentence correct?
_"If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner._"
I mean if+will +will?
Thanks in advance.




Ps
From here http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/other-conditionals.html


----------



## Alan7075

If you walk the dog, I'll prepare/make dinner

Ciao Ciao


----------



## kan3malato

Alan7075 said:


> If you walk the dog, I'll prepare/make dinner
> 
> Ciao Ciao


Thanks mate but I Think you did not pay too much attention, above all at the link
That sentence is not mine...


----------



## bise

So the verb "to walk" can be used in a transitive way?
Good to know!


----------



## Alan7075

kan3malato said:


> Thanks mate but I Think you did not pay too much attention, above all at the link
> That sentence is not mine...



An advice then, too many [new lines] are misleading. 

Ciao Ciao


----------



## london calling

Alan7075 said:


> If you walk the dog, I'll prepare/make dinner
> 
> Ciao Ciao


 
I agree, Alan! (First Conditional)

Kan3malato, I hope you're not the dog in question!

And if you're not, you'll make a wonderful husband for some lucky girl (but only if she likes dogs, of course!)
Jo


----------



## You little ripper!

The first part of that sentence is called the *conditional clause,* and *will* is not generally used here.

Link


----------



## anglomania1

kan3malato said:


> Morning, all
> In your opinion is this sentence correct?
> _"If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner._"
> I mean if+will +will?
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ps
> From here http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/other-conditionals.html


 

Hi there, 
just had a look at the link (and was horrified!!). I don't know about other natives, but I'd NEVER use if + will + will!! Just goes to show you can't believe everything you find on the net! 

PS Alan, allow me a quick correction: not "an advice" but "a piece of advice" or "some advice"
Anglo


----------



## Macsimo1975

It's grammatically incorrect, but the use of "will+will" and "would+would" is more and more into common usage.

I mean: don't write it in a letter, but it's accpeted in spoken language. 

Italian "congiuntivo passato" should be translated with the past perfect, but it's not:

"Se avessi tempo, andrei al concerto" should become: "If I had time, I'd go at the concert", but more and more often you hear (less read): "If I would have time, I would go at the concert". 

Yes, "walk" can be used in a transitive way. I remember a recent song by Bruce Springsteen titled "I could walk you home"


----------



## You little ripper!

anglomania1 said:


> Hi there,
> just had a look at the link (and was horrified!!). I don't know about other natives, but I'd NEVER use if + will + will!! Just goes to show you can't believe everything you find on the net!


I wouldn't use it either but I don't believe it's incorrect. You just don't hear it.


----------



## TrentinaNE

I suspect some people view it as more polite, as it sounds less like flat-out bargaining than saying "If you do X, then I'll do Y."  The link Charles provided says it's not "generally" used, not that it's incorrect. 

Ciao,
Elisabetta


----------



## anglomania1

Charles Costante said:


> I wouldn't use it either but I don't believe it's incorrect. You just don't hear it.


 

I don't know about you, but I've never heard it!! I can't believe it is on a site showing people English usage!!!

As for    "It's grammatically incorrect, but the use of "will+will" and "would+would" is more and more into common usage. I mean: don't write it in a letter, but it's accpeted in spoken language. "

Where exactly is it in common usage?  Am I living on another planet? (Admittedly I am living in Italy which I sometimes think is another planet)
Anglo






Anglo


----------



## london calling

TrentinaNE said:


> I suspect some people view it as more polite, as it sounds less like flat-out bargaining than saying "If you do X, then I'll do Y."  The link Charles provided says it's not "generally" used, not that it's incorrect.


 
Hello, everyone!
I agree with Anglo - I was horrified as well! As an ex-teacher of English, that to me is a big red pen job....


----------



## Macsimo1975

anglomania1 said:


> As for "It's grammatically incorrect, but the use of "will+will" and "would+would" is more and more into common usage. I mean: don't write it in a letter, but it's accpeted in spoken language. "
> 
> Where exactly is it in common usage?  Am I living on another planet? (Admittedly I am living in Italy which I sometimes think is another planet)
> Anglo
> 
> 
> 
> Anglo


 

 Eheh do you ever say "If I would do...," and then another conditional? I hear it quite often (ok, mainly from non-native speakers), though I don't like it...


----------



## anglomania1

Macsimo1975 said:


> Eheh do you ever say "If I would do...," and then another conditional? I hear it quite often (ok, mainly from non-native speakers - I think this answers your question!!! Non-natives or natives that don't know their own language!!! It happens, believe me!
> Anglo), though I don't like it...


----------



## london calling

Macsimo1975 said:


> Eheh do you ever say "If I would do...," and then another conditional? I hear it quite often (ok, mainly from non-native speakers), though I don't like it...just as well......


 

Caro Macsimo,

Una cosa del genere detto nelle mie vicinanze da un nativo comporta il concreto rischio di essere messi contro il muro e fucillati per alto tradimento ed oltraggio!


----------



## You little ripper!

london calling said:


> Hello, everyone!
> I agree with Anglo - I was horrified as well! As an ex-teacher of English, that to me is a big red pen job....


Jo, if the walking of the dog is something to happen in the future then is is perfectly acceptable in my opinion. 

*If you walk the dog (now), I'll do the dinner.*

*If you'll walk the dog (this evening), I'll do the dinner. *


----------



## Alan7075

anglomania1 said:


> PS Alan, allow me a quick correction: not "an advice" but "a piece of advice" or "some advice"
> Anglo



Not only do I allow you but also ask you for more corrections.

Thanks.

Ciao Ciao


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> Jo, if the walking of the dog is something to happen in the future then is is perfectly acceptable in my opinion.
> 
> *If you walk the dog (now), I'll do the dinner.*
> 
> *If you'll walk the dog (this evening), I'll do the dinner. *


Charles,
You and I must beg to differ on this point!  It may well have become common usage (but I've never heard it from a native), but to me it's just appalling grammar....


----------



## You little ripper!

london calling said:


> Charles,
> You and I must beg to differ on this point!  It may well have become common usage (but I've never heard it from a native), but to me it's just appalling grammar....


It's not common usage at all! As I said earlier you just don't hear it. Most people (including myself) would say *If you walk the dog, I'll do the dinner.*

Out of interest, what would you say here:

*If you (will) come this way, the manager will see you now.?
*


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> Out of interest, what would you say here:
> 
> *If you (will) come this way, the manager will see you now.?*


 
If you come this way, the manager will see you now.

The other version sounds terrible to me.... Maybe it's old age.....


----------



## You little ripper!

london calling said:


> If you come this way, the manager will see you now.
> 
> The other version sounds terrible to me.... Maybe it's old age.....


I would use the same one as you, but this is what that web site I provided earlier says:

_*1.* The conditional construction does not normally use will or would in if-clauses. EXCEPTION: If will or would express willingness, as in requests, they can be used in if-clauses. _
_e.g. If you will come this way, the manager will see you now._​


----------



## TrentinaNE

Which kind of ties in with the idea of "politeness" that I mentioned earlier... 

Elisabetta


----------



## You little ripper!

TrentinaNE said:


> Which kind of ties in with the idea of "politeness" that I mentioned earlier...
> 
> Elisabetta


That's right, and Kan's example fits into the same category. It still sounds strange to my ear. Would you use the *will *in those sentences in general conversation, Elisabetta?


----------



## Murphy

Just thought I'd chime in on the side of those who think this sentence construction is not incorrect, but just rare. I interpret it as follows:

In the "if" clause, "will" is used in it's original (old-fashioned, if you like) sense of "to be willing", while in the main clause it represents the future tense. So the sentence is saying:
"If you _are willing_ to walk the dog, I will make the dinner."  

You could formulate the sentence as a request instead of an "if" sentence like this:
"Will you walk the dog, please?  I'll make the dinner."

You can also use it in this way:

If you _will_ insist on sitting in the sun all day, don't be surprised when you get burned.
If you _will_ keep on asking the same question over and over again, the moderators are going to get very angry. 

In these last two sentences "will" doesn't represent the future form, but is a way of saying "if you choose to..." When spoken, the "will" would be emphasised as a way of illustrating the speaker's frustration.


----------



## london calling

TrentinaNE said:


> Which kind of ties in with the idea of "politeness" that I mentioned earlier...
> 
> Elisabetta


 

Hello, Elisabetta!

Do you think this could be more of an AE usage?

I noticed Charles' link was to an AE site and I can't find it anywhere in BE, not even as a possibility.....Has anyone got a BE link for it?


----------



## Einstein

I can't provide a link, but I can say that I agree with Murphy and that this form is not an AE or AusE exclusive. It's related to the two _woulds_ in this courtesy phrase:
I would/should be grateful if you would (were willing to) reply to this letter by return of post.

The standard First Conditional sentence is:
*If you walk the dog, I'll do the dinner*. But put like this it implies a continuation:
*... but if you don't walk the dog I won't do the dinner.*

We sometimes use "if" in a slightly different way and it means something more like "given that": *Oh, so you're going to walk the dog; right, and I'll do the dinner.*

*If you come this way, the manager will see you now*. This is OK, but suggests that *if you don't come this way the manager will see someone else*.

*If you'll come this way* means *Please be kind enough to come this way*. It's a courtesy form.


----------



## anglomania1

Murphy said:


> Just thought I'd chime in on the side of those who think this sentence construction is not incorrect, but just rare. I interpret it as follows:
> 
> In the "if" clause, "will" is used in it's original (old-fashioned, if you like) sense of "to be willing", while in the main clause it represents the future tense. So the sentence is saying:
> "If you _are willing_ to walk the dog, I will make the dinner."
> 
> You could formulate the sentence as a request instead of an "if" sentence like this:
> "Will you walk the dog, please? I'll make the dinner."
> 
> You can also use it in this way:
> 
> If you _will_ insist on sitting in the sun all day, don't be surprised when you get burned.
> If you _will_ keep on asking the same question over and over again, the moderators are going to get very angry.
> 
> In these last two sentences "will" doesn't represent the future form, but is a way of saying "if you choose to..." When spoken, the "will" would be emphasised as a way of illustrating the speaker's frustration.


 
Hello, 
actually, I think this is a good explanation. 
But I still think that in the original sentence of this thread the use of "will" is incorrect because we are not talking about politeness or frustration but simply "If you do this, I'll do the other", which, I believe, is a conditional sentence.
Anglo


----------



## london calling

Einstein said:


> I can't provide a link, but I can say that I agree with Charles and that this form is not an AE or AusE exclusive. It's related to the two _woulds_ in this courtesy phrase:
> I would/should be grateful if you would (were willing to) reply to this letter by return of post. Yes, certainly. I think I'd use _should...would_ or _should/would...could_ here.
> 
> The standard First Conditional sentence is:
> *If you walk the dog, I'll do the dinner*. But put like this it implies a continuation:
> *... but if you don't walk the dog I won't do the dinner.* It doesn't convey that idea to me at all!
> 
> We sometimes use "if" in a slightly different way and it means something more like "given that": *Oh, so you're going to walk the dog; right, and I'll do the dinner.* That's fine: two separate sentences (or almost ) and it's not conditional. You realise what the other person is going to do and as a consequence of that realisation you make a decision to do something else and there is no implication that you won't make the dinner if, for some reason, the other person doesn't take the dog for a walk!
> 
> *If you come this way, the manager will see you now*. This is OK, but suggests that *if you don't come this way the manager will see someone else*. It doesn't suggest that to me!
> 
> *If you'll come this way* means *Please be kind enough to come this way*. It's a courtesy form.
> Yes, Einstein, I agree with you, I would also use _If you'll come this way, please_...as a courtesy form, but by itself/stand-alone!


 
Oh, dear....

EDIT: in reply to Murphy and anglo.

Anglo, the sentence is indeed conditional, you're right (the First Conditional, in BE).

And Murphy, you are also quite right, but those sentences have little to do with the way you construct a First Conditional sentence: _If you walk the dog, I'll make the dinner._


----------



## anglomania1

london calling said:


> Oh, dear....


 

I have to agree with Lc here guys!

When we arrive home and have a lot of things to do, my Mum often says "Right, if you get the dinner ready, I'll bath the girls"!! She just likes organizing people and giving orders!! I certainly don't read it that if I don't do as she tells me, she won't do the other thing! She's not a dictator, you know (although my Dad sometimes calls her "she who must be obeyed")

To sum up , I think we can say it DOES exist but only for extreme politeness or frustration - as seen above - and certainly not in conditional sentences as in this thread (that's how I see it anyway),

Anglo


----------



## Murphy

Hi anglo,
I don't think it's a question of the sentence being correct or incorrect. If you look at the link, you'll see that the sentence is given as an example of how you _can _use "will" in an "if clause". Edit: kanmalato's question was directly related to the example given in the link. I wrote this post in answer to *your* *penultimate* post, not the subsequent one where you agree that the form does exist as one of the exceptions to the rule. At the risk of boring everyone silly, I'll leave it anyway

I agree that most people might not phrase it in this way, but I don't think you can say it is _wrong_ to do so in this particular context. Using "will" after "if" adds a nuance (whether of politeness or willingness) that isn't found in the standard 1st conditional sentence. It's one of those little subtleties that most school curriculums don't teach students, whether because of time constraints or other reasons, but I believe it would be wrong of us to state categorically that after "if" you can _never_ use "will".


----------



## anglomania1

Murphy said:


> Hi anglo,
> I don't think it's a question of the sentence being correct or incorrect. If you look at the link, you'll see that the sentence is given as an example of how you _can _use "will" in an "if clause". Edit: kanmalato's question was directly related to the example given in the link. I wrote this post in answer to *your* *penultimate* post, not the subsequent one where you agree that the form does exist as one of the exceptions to the rule. At the risk of boring everyone silly, I'll leave it anyway
> 
> I agree that most people might not phrase it in this way, but I don't think you can say it is _wrong_ to do so in this particular context. Using "will" after "if" adds a nuance (whether of politeness or willingness) that isn't found in the standard 1st conditional sentence. It's one of those little subtleties that most school curriculums don't teach students, whether because of time constraints or other reasons, but I believe it would be wrong of us to state categorically that after "if" you can _never_ use "will".


 

I agree, you can use "will" after "if" especially in the cases you mentioned above  - I just think that it was a bad example for them to put on a website (you explained the nuances, they didn't!) because most students will now think it's the norm! 
I think your examples (politeness/frustration) were great, but the original sentence sounds awful to me without strongly underlining that we hardly ever use it and that it is a nuance.
Anglo


----------



## Murphy

anglomania1 said:


> I agree, you can use "will" after "if" especially in the cases you mentioned above - I just think that it was a bad example for them to put on a website (you explained the nuances, they didn't!) because most students will now think it's the norm!


 
At the risk of sounding like I have a vested interest in the website in question (which I don't, although I have used it in the past), I just want to point out that this sentence was  given there as an example under the heading "Other Conditionals", and wasn't actually presented as the standard 1st conditional form


----------



## Einstein

*



If you come this way, the manager will see you now. This is OK, but suggests that if you don't come this way the manager will see someone else. It doesn't suggest that to me!

Click to expand...

*OK, lc, I was exaggerating (also in the other example). My point is that the standard First Conditional suggests a stricter dependence of one action on another.


----------



## anglomania1

Murphy said:


> At the risk of sounding like I have a vested interest in the website in question (which I don't, although I have used it in the past), I just want to point out that this sentence was given there as an example under the heading "Other Conditionals", and wasn't actually presented as the standard 1st conditional form


 

Yes, I saw that, but they didn't underline how rare it is or that it is not to be confused with the "real" conditionals. 
I know how a student's mind works and my students would read the site as if it was perfectly normal to use this form (the site doesn't state otherwise!)

It's a bit like when they write on microwaves not to put your pet inside -  it's obvious to you and me - but for others .....?
Anglo


----------



## You little ripper!

> Has anyone got a BE link for it?


The BBC World Service - Learning English website makes a brief reference to it, Jo. Link

Interestingly, the web site I provided earlier says *If will or would express willingness, as in requests, they can be used in if-clauses.* It doesn't say it must be used. No one has actually admitted to using it, and Jo and Anglo have made it quite clear that they dislike it. I don't use it; the only time I might use *will *in that sentence is if there had been previous discusion on whether the verb in that if-clause was to be done now or at some other time. One thing we can be certain of is that is is not incorrect to use *will* in the if-clause example provided by Kan.


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> The BBC World Service - Learning English website makes a brief reference to it, Jo. Link
> 
> Interestingly, the web site I provided earlier says *If will or would express willingness, as in requests, they can be used in if-clauses.* It doesn't say it must be used. No one has actually admitted to using it, and Jo and Anglo have made it quite clear that they dislike it. I don't use it; the only time I might use *will *in that sentence is if there had been previous discusion on whether the verb in that if-clause was to be done now or at some other time. One thing we can be certain of is that is is not incorrect to use *will* in the if-clause example provided by Kan.


Thanks, Charles!

Yes, certainly, but that talks about future result (fine by me!) , not the conditional, which is what we're talking about here!

Kan3's sentence is conditional, so the double "will" not only sounds terrible to me but I still consider it wrong in a conditional sentence! 

Will - willingness is a different matter, as are the other examples of the use of will that murphy and einstein have provided.


----------



## You little ripper!

Unfortunately I only had time to have a quick look but the fact that there is no mention of there being a difference between American and British English in that original web site I provided means that it applies to both. In my experience when it applies to only one or the other is it specified.


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> Unfortunately I only had time to have a quick look but the fact that there is no mention of there being a difference between American and British English in that original web site I provided means that it applies to both. In my experience when it applies to only one or the other is it specified.


Yes, you're right, there! However, it being the BBC, it's probably more BE...
Thanks again for the link: it confirms what I've been saying. In a _conditional_ sentence you can't use will twice....


----------



## You little ripper!

london calling said:


> Yes, you're right, there! However, it being the BBC, it's probably more BE...
> Thanks again for the link: it confirms what I've been saying. In a _conditional_ sentence you can't use will twice....


Have I got this right, Jo? Are you saying that *If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner* is not correct?


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> Have I got this right, Jo? Are you saying that *If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner* is not correct?


 
Exactly, Charles, because it's a conditional clause which doesn't come under the "future result" exception to the rule that the BBC gives as an example or any of the other examples people have provided.

I would correct it every time I heard it or read it!


----------



## Einstein

I would not normally use this construction and would certainly not teach it to students who are just beginning to study conditional forms. However, I think it's a bit rigid to rule it out entirely. The standard forms we teach are the most common and best illustrate the meanings of these constructions, but all kinds of sequences are possible in "minority" situations. I feel that the "will" in this example is like the "will" used in a request: "will you come this way, please?"
"If you'll come this way the manager will see you now" = "Se lei _vuole_ seguirmi..."


----------



## You little ripper!

london calling said:


> Exactly, Charles, because it's a conditional clause which doesn't come under the "future result" exception to the rule that the BBC gives as an example or any of the other examples people have provided.
> 
> I would correct it every time I heard it or read it!


Jo, *If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner* was the example given in that web site given by Kan as an instance where you can.

Anyway, I'm not putting any more energy into this; I think we've discussed, talked about, dissected and workshopped this ad nauseum.


----------



## london calling

Charles Costante said:


> Jo, *If you'll walk the dog, I'll do the dinner* was the example given in that web site given by Kan as an instance where you can.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not putting any more energy into this; I think we've discussed, talked about, dissected and workshopped this ad nauseum.


 
Right on, Charles!
We beg to differ!


----------



## Einstein

london calling said:


> Right on, Charles!
> We beg to differ!


 
Don't you mean _We'll agree to differ_ ?


----------



## mammut68

Macsimo1975 said:


> Italian "congiuntivo passato" should be translated with the past perfect, but it's not:
> 
> "Se avessi tempo, andrei al concerto"



Caro Macsimo1975, visto che si parla di grammatica, nota che "se avessi" non è congiuntivo passato, ma congiuntivo imperfetto. Ciao Mammut


----------



## london calling

Einstein said:


> Don't you mean _We'll agree to differ_ ?


 
Probably....!

I beg to differ (with you lot!)


----------

