# EN: Si tu lisais plus, tu connaîtrais X



## inarticulate

Bonjour tout le monde comment dire cette phrase en anglais ? : Si tu lisais plus, tu connaîtrais ce que "mot" veut dire.

J'ai essayé "If you read more you would know what "word" means.", ça c'est le deuxième conditionnel c'est utilisé pour parlé du future/present, donc c'est pas ça.

"If you had read more you would know what "word" means." un anglophone dirait cette phrase ? ou ça fait pas naturel ?.


----------



## leandere

Je ne suis pas certaine, mais je crois que c'est ainsi:_ If you would read more you would know what 'word' means_.


----------



## joelooc

If you read more you would understand what "word" means


----------



## inarticulate

Mais ça c'est le second conditional c'est utilisé pour parler du present/future. Si je dis ça l'interlocuteur va mal comprendre.


----------



## moustic

Both are possible:
If you read more _(in general - if you were in the habit of reading)_ you would know what xxx means.
If you had read more _(in the past/before now)_ you would know what xxx means.


----------



## inarticulate

Well that's the first time a I heard about it used like this good to know.. still a bit confusing since the construction is for SC.

Edit: does it work with any verb or only "read"?.


----------



## misterk

Just so there is no misunderstanding...
In "If you read more, you would...", the word "read" is the past tense of the verb "to read" (it is pronounced "red", and not "reed").
It's the same construction as "If you walked more, you would feel better."


----------



## moustic

inarticulate said:


> does it work with any verb or only "read"?


It works with most verbs:
If you worked more you would earn more money.


----------



## inarticulate

misterk said:


> In "If you read more, you would...", the word "read" is the past tense of the verb "to read" (it is pronounced "red", and not "reed").
> It's the same construction as "If you walked more, you would feel better."


yes I know I wrote the sentence after all considering it's a second conditional



moustic said:


> If you worked more you would earn more money.


That's a basic second conditional  .

I guess it's tricky with only some verbs like practice ( someone's fighting someone and the latter tells the former '' if you practiced more you would beat me." which normally should be "if you had practiced" but people use it this way, grammar doesn't cover this.


----------



## misterk

Note that "if you practiced more you would beat me" does not mean "if you had practiced more, you would beat me."
It means "if you were to practice more...".  I agree it's an unusual feature of English that appears to use the past tense to refer to a future action.


----------



## inarticulate

misterk said:


> Note that "if you practiced more you would beat me" does not mean "if you had practiced more, you would beat me."
> It means "if you were to practice more...".  I agree it's an unusual feature of English that appears to use the past tense to refer to a future action.


Yes that how I would understand it, because to me if+past tense of a verb+would = second conditional = to talk about future/present. I just said that some people use this combination to talk about past like moustic said.


moustic said:


> If you read more _(in general - if you were in the habit of reading)_ you would know what xxx means.


----------



## Sachandréa

"If you read more you would know what "word" means."

Le verbe "read" est conjugué au passé, mais dans ce cas, il n'indique pas le passé mais une hypothèse qui ne correspond pas à une réalité du présent.

"if you read more" implique : "you don't read enough, that's why you don't know what "word" means"


----------



## Enquiring Mind

Read (pronounced "red" in the sentence in #1) _*looks like*_ the past tense, but is actually the subjunctive (describing a hypothetical situation introduced by "if"). In the case of the verb "read" (and most other verbs), the subjunctive has the same form as the past tense. But if we use the verb "to be", we can see that it isn't the past tense.
If I were you, I would _(BE) practise/(AE) practice_ more, then you'd [= you would] beat me. [If I was you .... ]
If you were to _(BE) practise/(AE) practice _more [= if you practiced more], you'd beat me. 


> *Le subjonctif en anglais* (...)
> *Les souhaits et les situations hypothétiques *
> De plus, on utilise le subjonctif pour exprimer des souhaits ou décrire des situations hypothétiques, normalement après if (si) ou as if (comme si) : If I were (et non pas If I was) a millionaire, I would buy a villa in the West Indies. (Si j’étais millionnaire [je ne le suis pas], j’achèterais une villa dans les Antilles.)(legoutdufrancais.org - pdf)


----------



## Maître Capello

Il s'agit en effet du *past subjunctive* qui se conjugue exactement comme le simple past, sauf pour le verbe _to be_. Quoi qu'il en soit, inarticulate, à part cette « exception » du verbe _to be_, tu peux considérer qu'il faut utiliser les « mêmes » temps en anglais qu'en français pour toutes les propositions conditionnelles :

Si tu *lis* _{présent}_ beaucoup, tu *apprends* _{présent}_ de nouveaux mots. ↔ _If you *read* _{simple present}_ a lot, you *learn* _{simple present}_ new words._

Si tu *lisais* _{imparfait}_ plus, tu *saurais** _{conditionnel}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *read* _{past subjunctive ≈ simple past}_ more, you *would know* _{conditional}_ what X means._ (* plutôt que _connaîtrais_, cf. savoir / connaître)

Si tu *avais lu* _{plus-que-parfait}_ plus, tu *saurais* _{conditionnel}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *had read* _{pluperfect subjunctive}_ more, you *would know* _{conditional}_ what X means._
Si tu *avais lu* _{plus-que-parfait}_ plus, tu *aurais su* _{conditionnel passé}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *had read* _{pluperfect subjunctive}_ more, you *would have known* _{past conditional}_ what X means._


----------



## joelooc

Ceci explique pourquoi on ne dit pas
Si je trouv*erai*s un boulot j’aurais beaucoup moins de temps libre. mais:
Si je trouv*ais* un boulot j’aur*ais* beaucoup moins de temps libre.
If I found a job I would have much less free time.
à l’irréel du présent de la subordonnée : Si je trouv*ais* un boulot
correspond l’irréel du futur de la principale : j’aur*ais* beaucoup moins de temps libre.
Revenez au réel en remplaçant si par quand:
Quand j’ai un boulot, j’aurai beaucoup moins de temps libre.
C'est exactement ce que dit le citoyen Britannique
When I have a job, I will have much less free time
Comme en Anglais le futur n'est pas un temps mais un mode c'est le modal qui porte la marque d'irréel (le conditionnel n'étant qu'un futur hypothétique lié à une condition.
Cette petite manipulation permet de mettre en évidence que la marque de passé, en Français comme en Anglais peut aussi bien signifier une action passée qu'une action irréelle au présent comme au futur.


----------



## inarticulate

Maître Capello said:


> Il s'agit en effet du *past subjunctive* qui se conjugue exactement comme le simple past, sauf pour le verbe _to be_. Quoi qu'il en soit, inarticulate, à part cette « exception » du verbe _to be_, tu peux considérer qu'il faut utiliser les « mêmes » temps en anglais qu'en français pour toutes les propositions conditionnelles :
> 
> Si tu *lis* _{présent}_ beaucoup, tu *apprends* _{présent}_ de nouveaux mots. ↔ _If you *read* _{simple present}_ a lot, you *learn* _{simple present}_ new words._
> 
> Si tu *lisais* _{imparfait}_ plus, tu *saurais** _{conditionnel}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *read* _{past subjunctive ≈ simple past}_ more, you *would know* _{conditional}_ what X means._ (* plutôt que _connaîtrais_, cf. savoir / connaître)
> 
> Si tu *avais lu* _{plus-que-parfait}_ plus, tu *saurais* _{conditionnel}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *had read* _{pluperfect subjunctive}_ more, you *would know* _{conditional}_ what X means._
> Si tu *avais lu* _{plus-que-parfait}_ plus, tu *aurais su* _{conditionnel passé}_ ce que X veut dire. ↔ _If you *had read* _{pluperfect subjunctive}_ more, you *would have known* _{past conditional}_ what X means._


Je vois merci, c'est difficile a distinguer car dans le " Second conditional "  on peut dire la même phrase ''If you read(past simple) more you would know''. mais les deux signifient que je connais pas ce que ca veut dire " word " dans c'est pas vraiment un problème.


----------

