# If I had known that he was coming/would come/would have come



## odiernod

La frase: 
If I had known he was coming, I'd have made more food.
Ho tradotto:
Se io avessi saputo che venisse, avrei preparato piu' cibo.

Ma non sono sicura se "avessi saputo che venisse" sia esato per questo caso.

Grazie per l'aiuto.

-Domenico


----------



## effeundici

What's the difference between 

If I had known he would have come
If I had know he would come
If I had known he was coming

I'm asking because I do not know how to translate effectively


----------



## odiernod

"If I had known he would have come" vuol dire non sapevo che poteva venire,  ma per qualsiasi ragione (conosciuto o sconociuto) non e' venuto.

"If I had known he would come" e' pravatamente stesso, l maggior parte dei americani usa questi frasi interscambiabilmente.

"If I had known he was coming" vuol dire che e' venuto, ma non sapevo che veniva, fino a e' venuto.


----------



## randomfuoco

Ecco i miei tentativi effeundici. Scorrono bene in italiano o no? Se non, cercero' di spiegare le differenze sottili in inglese.
If I had known he would have come = "Se io avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto..."
If I had known he would come = "Se io avessi saputo che verrebbe..."
If I had known he was coming = "Se io avessi saputo che veniva... "


----------



## VolaVer

odiernod said:


> La frase:
> If I had known he was coming, I'd have made more food.
> Ho tradotto:
> Se io avessi saputo che venisse, avrei preparato piu' cibo.
> 
> Ma non sono sicura se "avessi saputo che venisse" sia esato per questo caso.
> 
> Grazie per l'aiuto.
> -Domenico


 Infatti scusa, ma "se avessi saputo che venisse" è sbagliato in ogni caso.
Come ha tradotto randomfuoco, il secondo Congiuntivo dovrebbe essere un Indicativo Imperfetto.:
"Se avessi saputo che veniva, avrei preparato più cibo."

Ciao!


----------



## odiernod

Grazie, 

veniva vs venisse era la parte dove non ero sicuro.


----------



## effeundici

randomfuoco said:


> Ecco i miei tentativi effeundici. Scorrono bene in italiano o no? Se non, cercero' di spiegare le differenze sottili in inglese.
> If I had known he would have come = "Se io avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto..."
> If I had known he would come = "Se io avessi saputo che verrebbe..."
> If I had known he was coming = "Se io avessi saputo che veniva... "


 
But actually 1 and 3 mean more or less the same thing in Italian; isn't it the same in English?

I feel somehow that this sentence is VERY tricky. We need a bilangual!


----------



## odiernod

Scrivero in inglese e italiano tutti e due per provare evitare confusione:



> Originally Posted by *randomfuoco*
> 
> 
> Ecco i miei tentativi effeundici. Scorrono bene in italiano o no? Se non, cercero' di spiegare le differenze sottili in inglese.
> If I had known he would have come = "Se io avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto..."
> If I had known he would come = "Se io avessi saputo che verrebbe..."
> If I had known he was coming = "Se io avessi saputo che veniva... "



In inglese, 1 e 2 voglione dire la stessa cosa, la persona non veniva, ma forse sarebbe venuto se qualcosa altra avrebbe successo.

Per esempio, non veniva perche' non ho preparato abbastanza cibo, ma se io avessi preparato abbastanza cibo, sarebbe venuto. Ma non sapevo che sarebbe venuto, quindi non ho preparato abbastanza cibo.

3 vuol dire che la persona veniva, ma non sapevo che veniva prima di e' arrivato.

Per esempio, veniva, ma non ho preparato abbastanza cibo perche' non sapevo che veniva.



In English, 1 and 2 mean the same thing, the person didn't come, but he would have come if mabye something else had happened earlier.

For example, he didn't come because I didn't make enough food, but he would have come had I made enough food.  But because I didn't know that he would have come had I made enough food, I didn't know to make more food.

3 means that the person came, but I didn't know he was coming until he got there.  If I would have known he was coming, I would have made more food.


Spero veremente che quest messagio ha senso!


----------



## Alxmrphi

1) makes it seem like an invite was sent out, but the person wasn't sure whether he would decide to come or not.
2) makes it seem that the speaker didn't expect him to come (but knew he'd been invited)
3) makes it seem that the speaker didn't even know he had been invited, but he is planning on coming.



> In English, 1 and 2 mean the same thing, the person didn't come, but he would have come if mabye something else had happened earlier.


Sorry I have to disagree with this, in those first parts alone this isn't implied in the meaning. It's possible they just didn't want to come, it's not subject to something else happening, maybe they just don't like the person's house or that person, but out of curtosy they were invited.

What you are referring to is *subject + would have come + if*...

He would have come if + conditional.. (something else happening earlier)

We can view the sentence differently "If I had known...." where this isn't part of the specified condition, it makes sense.. so we would then have 2 conditional sentences within each other..
*
If I had known*.............*he would have come if I had made more food*........*I would have made more food.*

And the part referring to the prior condition, that means he would have come, is not related to "If I had known", but exists within that sentence, but it's getting into quite a complicated explanation now.


----------



## effeundici

I think I am beginning to understand.

Probably these are very different sentences. Let's change the verbs because the ones we are using a bit tricky in my opinion.

_If I had shouted (then) he would have understood_
_If I had shouted (then) he would understand_
_Se avessi urlato (allora) avrebbe capito_

_If I had known (that) he was coming_
_Se avessi saputo che veniva_
_Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto_

Does it make sense?


----------



## Alxmrphi

Yep it does, but your second example in the first group of three is a little bit odd, I'd say the top sentence....

If I shouted then he would understand

Adding 'had' and keeping 'would understand', though perfectly understandable, I'm not sure if it's grammatically correct.


----------



## brian

Alex, I agree with you in this particular example, but it's quite possible to have the past perfect (_had ___ed_) in the "protasis" (if-clause) and present conditional (_would ____) in the "apodosis" (then-clause):

_If I had invited him, he would (now) be here._
_Se lo avessi invitato, sarebbe qui (adesso)._

Now, going to this:



> 1. If I had known he would have come
> 2. If I had known he would come
> 3. If I had known he was coming


I'd say:


the verb _come_ in (1) is part of a _second, _embedded & understood conditional clause, for example:
_If I had known that he would have come *if I had invited him*, then of course I would have invited him!_

In this case, he did *not* come!​
the verb _come_ in (2) is also part of a _second_, embedded & understood conditional clause, for example:
_If I had known that he would come *if I invited him*, then of course I would have invited him!

_This sounds weird though. In fact, _If I had known he would come_ sounds weird to begin with. I would avoid this construction altogether. But for the record, I think it implies he did *not* come.​
Regarding (3), I agree with the above: he *did* come, in the end, but I didn't know it beforehand.
P.S. The protases (if-clauses) in blue; the apodoses (then-clauses) in brown/maroon.


----------



## Alxmrphi

> Alex, I agree with you in this particular example, but it's quite possible to have the past perfect (_had ___ed_) in the "protasis" (if-clause) and present conditional (_would ____) in the "apodosis" (then-clause):


Oooh mr fancy words (only joking)
Yeah, that's because it's reflective of a....hmm...can't think of the word, a sort of state, something that lasts a bit of time, it doesn't work with_ understand_ because that doesn't last a long period of time (in this example), it happens in an instant, that's why none of the following would work...

If I had popped his baloon he would cry.
If I had closed the curtains he wouldn't see me.
If I had laughed at his joke he would smile at me.

Because all the above actions are verbs that express something quickly, non-lasting, wheras if we do refer to long-lasting actions (I found my term for it) then we can use this structure..

If I had given him coffee, he'd be awake.
If I had said nasty things about his wife then he wouldn't like me.
If I had let him dress himself, he would look stupid.

...
And then it's easy enough for us to put those verbs in the apodoses clauses in the past, if we want to reflect the action was in the past and doesn't have any relevance to the present.

Do you agree?


----------



## odiernod

> Yep it does, but your second example in the first group of three is a little bit odd, I'd say the top sentence....
> 
> If I shouted then he would understand
> 
> Adding 'had' and keeping 'would understand', though perfectly understandable, I'm not sure if it's grammatically correct.



"If I had shouted then he would understand" is not grammatically correct, 
but creating 
"If I shouted then he would understand" actually changes the meaning of the sentence.  You no longer have a past conditional, instead you have a present conditional where "shouted" is the present subjunctive of "to shout".


----------



## effeundici

_Se avessi saputo che veniva allora...._
_Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto allora.._
_Se avessi saputo che stava venendo allora.._

Would you translate all the above sentences to:

_If I had known he was coming then..._


----------



## brian

I would translate all 3 as _If I had known he was coming, then..._


----------



## effeundici

brian8733 said:


> I would translate all 3 as _If I had known he was coming, then..._


 

Mmmhh, 1/2 and 3 are quite different.

1/2 refer to an _arrived _guy; 3 refers to an _approaching _guy.


----------



## odiernod

"If I would have known he would have come"  refers to a guy who did not arrive.

"If I would have known he was coming"  refers to a guy who arrived.


----------



## brian

effeundici said:


> Mmmhh, 1/2 and 3 are quite different.
> 
> 1/2 refer to an _arrived _guy; 3 refers to an _approaching _guy.



Yeah, you can't really distinguish in English.


----------



## effeundici

brian8733 said:


> Yeah, you can't really distinguish in English.


 
_If I had known he was about to come_??


----------



## Alxmrphi

Hi Brian.. odiernod did (post #18)


----------



## brian

effeundici said:


> _If I had known he was about to come_??



That would mean _Se avessi saputo che stava per venire_.



			
				Alex said:
			
		

> Hi Brian.. odiernod did (post #18)





			
				odernod said:
			
		

> "If I would have known he would have come"  refers to a guy who did not arrive.
> 
> "If I would have known he was coming"  refers to a guy who arrived.



Effeundici wants to distinguish _not_ between 1) a guy who did not arrive and 2) a guy who did arrive, but between 1) a guy who is in the process of arriving (and has not yet arrived) and 2) a guy who has not yet arrived, but presumably has not yet left.

So if you really needed to distinguish in English, you'd have to say something like:

_Se avessi saputo che veniva, ... = If I had known he was coming, ...
Se avessi saputo che stava venendo, ... = If I had known that he was on his way, ..._

but this is of course particular to the verb _venire_; the translation would therefore change depending on context.


----------



## effeundici

I'm going crazy!!!

Is it:

_If I would have known (then) he would have come_

or

_If I would have known (that) he would have come_

Edit: I've just been told that #2 is rigth. My goodness!! I can't believe it means the guy did not arrive.Please explain or I won't be able to sleep!
It sounds so_: Se avessi saputo che lui sarebbe arrivato (_in Italian this guy came!!)


----------



## Alxmrphi

What I think we were referring to brian was that you said you'd translate them all as "If I had known he was coming"...
That is why we are distinguishing between the guy who did arrive, and didn't arrive. (which can be done also in English, like odi mentioned)

Actually I see what you mean, we're comparing and linking them up when all the Italian versions mean he did arrive.. (I thought F11 one meant he didn't end up coming)

In that case, how do you translate:

_*If I had known he would not come *_(and didn't come) in Italian?

My head is going to explode.....


----------



## effeundici

Alxmrphi said:


> _*If I had known he would not come *_(and didn't come) in Italian?
> 
> _Se avessi saputo che lui non arrivava / non sarebbe arrivato_
> 
> My head is going to explode.....


----------



## brian

effeundici said:


> I'm going crazy!!!
> 
> Is it:
> 
> 1a. _If I would have known (had known)*,* (then) he would have come_.
> 
> or
> 
> 1b. _If I would have known (had known) that*,* he would have come_.



These are equal; the word "that" is optional, and refers to "lo" in Italian: _Se l'avessi saputo, allora sarebbe venuto.

_I prefer "If I had known" (subjunctive), but some people, especially BE speakers I think, will say "If I would have known."

 2a. _If I would have known (had known) that he would have come...

_This is *completely different*. The omission of the comma means that "that" introduces a subordinate clause, so the sentence is incomplete: _Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto..._

Again, I find this sentence odd in English.

So recap: "that" in 1b is a *pronoun* ("lo"), and "that" in 2a is a *conjunction* ("che") introducing a subordinate clause.


----------



## effeundici

Ok.

*If I had known that (*conjunction*) he would have come then....*

What's the translation to Italian?


----------



## brian

effeundici said:


> Ok.
> 
> *If I had known that (*conjunction*) he would have come then....*
> 
> What's the translation to Italian?



Let me repeat one more time: I find this sentence *odd* in English! Okay, to me it seems like there is an *incomplete, second conditional clause*. For example, _If I had known that he would have come if I had invited him, then I would have invited him._ = _Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto se l'avessi invitato, allora l'avrei invitato._

That's the only way it makes sense to me; otherwise, it should be _If I had known that he was coming / was going to come, then..._ = _Se avessi saputo che veniva, allora..._


----------



## brian

Alex, I no longer have any idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Alxmrphi

brian8733 said:


> Alex, I no longer have any idea what you're talking about.



Neither do I ok I'll prepare a new clear question...


----------



## effeundici

Ok, this is what I hoped to read! 

Thank you.



brian8733 said:


> Let me repeat one more time: I find this sentence *odd* in English! To me it seems like there is an *incomplete, second conditional clause*. For example, _If I had known that he would have come if I had invited him, then I would have invited him._ = _Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto se l'avessi invitato, allora l'avrei invitato._
> 
> That's the only way it makes sense to me; otherwise, it should be _If I had known that he was coming / was going to come, then..._ = _Se avessi saputo che veniva, allora..._


----------



## brian

You're welcome.

And as a final comment (well, until Alex makes us go crazy a 2nd time ):

_If I had known that he was coming, ..._ can mean both of the following: _Se avessi saputo che *veniva / stava venendo*, ..._

since, like I said, it's difficult to distinguish in English.


----------



## odiernod

> _Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto se l'avessi invitato, allora l'avrei invitato._


Please tell me that this guy didn't come, but would have had he been invited.

Se no, la mia testa anche esplodera!


----------



## brian

Right, he did *not* come!


----------



## effeundici

odiernod said:


> Please tell me that this guy didn't come, but would have had he been invited.
> 
> Se no, la mia testa anche esplodera!


 

_Brian did not invite him, so he did not come, but if Brian had invited him,he would have come!_

But let me tell you that when this guy comes, we will beat him up!!!


----------



## Alxmrphi

It's easier if I just go shoot myself and resolve the matter that way........

I've had a timeout and in a clearer mood I can see how ambiguity can arise and that just like "*If I had known he would come*" can mean he did come and that he didn't, so can "*Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto*" (that was the one that was confusing me) it's only really possible with a fuller sentence to determine which one it means...

My last question, and this is purely because no tenses are making sense to me now...


1) (@ brian) Is this still the case for "*If I had known he would have come*" in English as well..

2) Would "*Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto*" translate both "*If I had known he would have come*" and "*If I had known he would come*" ?


----------



## Odysseus54

brian8733 said:


> Let me repeat one more time: I find this sentence *odd* in English! To me it seems like there is an *incomplete, second conditional clause*. For example, _If I had known that he would have come if I had invited him, then I would have invited him._ = _Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto se l'avessi invitato, allora l'avrei invitato._
> 
> That's the only way it makes sense to me; otherwise, it should be _If I had known that he was coming / was going to come, then..._ = _Se avessi saputo che veniva, allora..._



Let's compare these two , one with the perfect conditional, the other with the imperfect conditional.


- If I had known that he would have come, I would have invited him.  

- If I had known that he would come, I would have invited him.  


Are these equivalent or not ?


----------



## brian

Alxmrphi said:


> 1) (@ brian) Is this still the case for "*If I had known he would have come*" in English as well..
> 
> Like I said, to me it sounds like a second (embedded) conditional, i.e. something that *had not happened yet* (it is hypothetical!), so ... *no, he has not come*. (but he would have if...)
> 
> 2) Would "*Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto*" translate both "*If I had known he would have come*" and "*If I had known he would come*"?
> 
> I find "would come" *very odd*; I'm not sure what it means in that sentence.





			
				Odysseus54 said:
			
		

> - If I had known that he would have come, I would have invited him.
> 
> - If I had known that he would come, I would have invited him.
> 
> 
> Are these equivalent or not ?



No, like I wrote to Alex, I don't know what the 2nd one (with "would come") is supposed to mean.

The first one is fine -- it has an unstated, second, embedded conditional clause.


----------



## brian

I just realized I got confused and made a mistake in post #*28*, regarding which _English_ version sounds weird. I have now edited it to reflect what I said in post #*12*.

I'll repeat it here one more time just to be clear:

_If I had known that he *would have come*, then ..._ OKAY , with unstated, embedded, second conditional clause!!

_If I had known that he *would come*, then ..._ WEIRD , no idea what this is supposed to mean!!


----------



## Alxmrphi

In 1) I just wanted a clarification on whether the version with 'have' also meant that could have come and maybe didn't, example:

Mary is in the kitchen with Jane, and Paul turns up....
Mary is hosting the party and says to Jane.. "Is that Paul over there?"
Jane responds that it is Paul.
Mary says to Jane "*If I had known that he'd come, I would have sent him an invitation*, now I feel embarassed because he probably doesn't feel welcome.
Jane has an idea, my son's upstairs trying to work out conditional sentences, maybe he could go and help him... (lol)

*Then we go to the parallel universe...*

Mary is in the kitchen with Jane, and Jack turns up (*without Paul*)....
Jack goes to Mary and says "Why didn't you invite Paul?"
Mary responds with "I didn't think he'd like it here, I didn't see the point in inviting him, I was sure he wouldn't like it and might feel pressured to sit through a night of us talking about old times, and we didn't even know him then. *If I had known that he'd come, I'd have sent him an invitation*, now I feel embarassed because he probably feels like I don't like him.


Right.......... two situations, same line....... and it works......
I've just seen Brain post something saying this structure is weird........ so maybe that's part of the confusion because it seems fine to me.

In both examples we could include "have" (If I had known he'd have come) it doesn't really change anything because it would still work in the context..

Ok, I am not sure anymore.. could somebody just give me what the Italian would be in both examples then I just accept it and go to bed....
Comments on if you think I've done something grammatically incorrect with the English are also welcome, it might help me a lot.
I don't even remember what my question is...... or what I am confused about......


----------



## brian

Okay Alex, it seems we disagree on the English. Maybe it's an AE/BE thing -- not sure.

Anyway, here is my take:



Alxmrphi said:


> In 1) I just wanted a clarification on whether the version with 'have' also meant that could have come and maybe didn't, example:
> 
> Mary is in the kitchen with Jane, and Paul turns up....
> Mary is hosting the party and says to Jane.. "Is that Paul over there?"
> Jane responds that it is Paul.
> Mary says to Jane  "*If I had known that he'd come, I would have sent him an invitation*  *If I had known that he was coming (was going to come), I would have ... = Se avessi saputo che veniva (sarebbe venuto), avrei ...* now I feel embarassed because he probably doesn't feel welcome.
> Jane has an idea, my son's upstairs trying to work out conditional sentences, maybe he could go and help him... (lol)
> 
> *Then we go to the parallel universe...*
> 
> Mary is in the kitchen with Jane, and Jack turns up (*without Paul*)....
> Jack goes to Mary and says "Why didn't you invite Paul?"
> Mary responds with "I didn't think he'd like it here, I didn't see the point in inviting him, I was sure he wouldn't like it and might feel pressured to sit through a night of us talking about old times, and we didn't even know him then.  *If I had known that he'd come, I'd have sent him an invitation*  *If I had known that he would have come, I would have ... = Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto, avrei ...* now I feel embarassed because he probably feels like I don't like him.
> 
> [...]



Wait for confirmation.


----------



## Alxmrphi

I went to go and 'consult' my grammar book _(aka tear through the pages like a mad man trying to get to the part on conditionals)_
Does it still sound unusual if we change the order?

*I would have sent him an invite if I had known he would come.*.

Does that sound unusual to you? (I'm beginning to think it could be a AE/BE thing as well)


----------



## brian

That does sound a little better, yes; it sounds even better with _thought_ instead of _know_.

But I need to sit out for a while. 

I also think we should stop posting and allow the Italians to confirm my translations, or not, before we continue on.

I need a break.


----------



## tomzenith

This probably isn't helpful (strangely people never seem to enthusiastic when I start by saying that..) but it seems to me that you are both right in different ways, except that you are getting at different things.. Ignore/delete this if it does more harm than good!

Brian (if I'm right) is dealing in specifics: 'if I'd known *he was coming*(if he did come)/*he would have come*(if he didn't) to *this party*, I would have invited him.' Obviously this needs the past conditional.

Alex is dealing in generalities: 'if I'd known *he would come*(regardless of whether or not he did) *to parties in general*, I would have invited him'. The idea seems to be that if I had known he was that sort of person (that is to say,* the sort of person who would come*) he would have got an invitation. In the same way you could say: 'if I had known he would be so ugly, I wouldn't have agreed to go out with him' - we're talking about attributes rather than actions. I think that this is the reason that Paul's attendence/non-attendence doesn't seem significant to you Alex, am I right?

Does that make any sense?


----------



## Alxmrphi

tomzenith said:


> Does that make any sense?



lol don't take this the wrong way, but no!  (not the first read anyway)



> I think that this is the reason that Paul's attendence/non-attendence doesn't seem significant to you Alex, am I right?


I don't get this part.. the point I was trying to express was that the sentence could be used in a situation where he did attend and in one that he didn't attend...
I do see what you sort of mean, but I was more interested in both individually, rather than none at all...
Your post makes more sense on the 4th read

Right... 
_*
If I'd known he was coming* - he actually did turn up _(but not at that point)
*If I'd known he would come* - this can be used if he did turn up and also if he didn't
_*If I'd known he would have come*_ - this can be used if he did turn up and also if he didn't _(this is problematic for me, sometimes it seems like it should be used only if he didn't turn up, but if I think of that situation with Mary, Jane & Paul (he turned up), and Mary says "If I'd known he'd have come.. then I would have invited him".... I can't deny this sounds correct to me, maybe it's the elision and removal of the full word "would"...)
_ 
I think if that's correct, all my doubts are put to rest.
(I can appreciate some would not sound normal, but I mean grammatically correct..


----------



## Odysseus54

brian8733 said:


> _If I had known that he *would come*, then ..._ WEIRD , no idea what this is supposed to mean!!



Is 'weird' mean 'awkward' ,  'ambiguous', or 'obscure' ?

P.S. - I think Alex answered that - Let's see if we have a consensus.


----------



## odiernod

"weird" normalmente vuol dire "strano", potrebbe anche volere dire "awkward".


----------



## Odysseus54

*If I had known that he was coming (was going to come), I would have ... = Se avessi saputo che veniva (sarebbe venuto), avrei**..

If I had known that he would have come, I would have ... = Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto, avrei ...*


Le due traduzioni sono corrette, mi pare -nel primo caso e' venuto, nel secondo caso la frase puo' indicare sia che e' venuto, sia che non e' venuto.

Per esempio : "Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto, lo avrei invitato" e' di per se' ambigua.  La frase in inglese e' ugualmente ambigua ?


*

*


----------



## Alxmrphi

Odysseus54 said:


> Per esempio : "Se avessi saputo che sarebbe venuto, lo avrei invitato" e' di per se' ambigua. La frase in inglese e' ugualmente ambigua ?


 
Credo proprio di sì !


----------

