# if something will happen = Si es que [lo que sea] ocurre



## dilema

Hello all,

A few days ago I run into a conditional with future tense in the "if" clause (I don't remember the example, sorry). At the moment, I didn't quite understan why that tense was used but now I wonder if it may be the equivalente to our Spanish "si es que [finalmente] + verbo" (which just emphasizes a bit the more neutral "si + verbo"). For example, would it be ok to say:



Pediré las vacaciones en agosto, si es que me operan de la rodilla antes --> I'll take my holidays in August, if I'll have my knee operated on before
Siempre pagas tú cuando salimos a comer. La próxima pago yo, si es que no vuelvo a olvidarme la cartera --> When we go out for lunch, it's always you who pays. Next time, it'll be me who pays, if I won't forget again my wallet.

Thanks.


----------



## Gabriel

I think that the if in the future is a rhetorical way to say what one wants to do or to happen GIVEN that somethign WILL happen. So in fact it express preference about some certainty in the future. In those cases, the IF can be replaced with a GIVEN THAT. Example:

- We have to find a way to avoid this from happening.
- We can't. This will happen sooner or later, no matter what.
- If this will happen, we better be prepared for that moment. // Given that this will happen, we better...


----------



## Andoush

Gabriel said:


> If this will happen, we better be prepared for that moment. // Given that this will happen, we better...


No creo, Gabriel. Me atrevería a decir que los anglófonos dirían: "if this happens" o "if this does happen"...
Dilemma, ¡qué pena que no recuerdes la frase en cuestión! Me temo que tus ejemplos tampoco suenen bien...
(no me maten, compañeros foreros...)
A ver qué nos dicen los anglófonos...


----------



## Eddie P

*"If"* es condicional como ejemplo "*Y sí no vienes?*" asi que "*will*" es un auxiliar para el futuro solamente.
Nunca diriamos "*Y si no vendrás?*" Por lo tanto, "*Sí algo pasa?*" es "*If something happens?*" en presente.

*Sí algo llegara a pasar en el futuro... = If something would happen in the future...*

I hope this helps.


----------



## Gabriel

Andoush said:


> No creo, Gabriel. Me atrevería a decir que los anglófonos dirían: "if this happens" o "if this does happen"...
> Dilemma, ¡qué pena que no recuerdes la frase en cuestión! Me temo que tus ejemplos tampoco suenen bien...
> (no me maten, compañeros foreros...)
> A ver qué nos dicen los anglófonos...


¿Cómo te voy a matar? Si por eso comencé mi comentario con "I think", y además mi firma es lo que es.

De todas formas, hay una clara diferencia entre el sentido de "if this happens...", donde hay incertidumbre acerca de si eso va apasar o no, y el que digo yo que hay certeza de que eso va a pasar. Invento:

- She suspects that she is adopted, and she is starting to asks questions. But I don't know if she should learn the truth.
- The question is not if she should. It could be soon or in many of years. It could be from you or from someone else. But what is certain is that, in some way or another, she _will_ learn the truth.
- Yea, I know where you are going. If she _will_ learn the truth in some way or another, she better learns it now and from her parents, right?


----------



## Andoush

Gabriel said:


> ...If she _will_ learn the truth in some way or another, she better learns it now and from her parents, right?


En este caso yo diría: "If she is going to learn the truth anyway, she'd better learn (sin "s")..." pero ¿por dónde andan todos nuestros compañeros anglófonos? _Help!_


----------



## Eddie P

*Andoush is correct 
*
*"if this happens"   =   "Sí esto sucede..."
"if that does happen"   =    "Y sí eso si sucede..."*


----------



## JennyTW

Hola. Primero, la forma correcta con better es "had better", o sea, " she'd better learn. Segundo, "will" normalmente no se usa despues de if, salvo para enfásis cuando hay un comportamiento molesto repetitivo, como; "if you WILL keep doing that, I'll have to tell your parents ". Aqui lo correcto sería "if she's going to learn the truth anyway, she'd better learn it/ she'd be better off learning it ...."


----------



## Gabriel

Tow things:
Sorry and thanks about the "had better done".
Thanks "if she's going to...". I knew it had to be some future tense, but I got the wrong future tense.


----------



## dilema

JennyTW said:


> Hola. Primero, la forma correcta con better es "had better", o sea, " she'd better learn. Segundo, "will" normalmente no se usa despues de if, salvo para enfásis cuando hay un comportamiento molesto repetitivo, como; "if you WILL keep doing that, I'll have to tell your parents ". Aqui lo correcto sería "if she's going to learn the truth anyway, she'd better learn it/ she'd be better off learning it ...."


Gracias a todos por vuestras respuestas (y perdón por no aparecer antes).

Es interesante lo que apunta Jenny, aunque no recuerdo que la frase que me llamó la atención fuera de ese tipo. Así que he buscado en google frase con "if you will" y he dado con estos ejemplos, entre otros, (http://www.linguee.es/ingles-espanol/traduccion/if+you+will.html):

*If you will be staying in the country for several months, the aparthotel option is the most convenient and practical.
**If you will allow  me, I would like to offer three examples: the first concerns the  operation of the uranium mines in Niger by European businesses*

¿Podría entenderse, de ellos, que el futuro se usa cuando se quiere ser más formal? ¿Aporta el futuro, en casos como éstos, algún matiz que no tiene el presente?

Gracias nuevamente.


----------



## Gabriel

_If you will be staying in the country for several months, the aparthotel option is the most convenient and practical._
En esta oración, no creo que se pueda reemplazar el futuro con presente. Sí creo que el futuro, como aportaron otros foreros, quedaría muy bien con "If you are going to stay in the country..."

_If you will allow me, I would like to offer three examples: the first concerns the operation of the uranium mines in Niger by European businesses_
En este caso no creo que trate precisamente de futuro, sino más bien de una fórmula de cortesía.
"If you will" se usa como "si usted lo desea" o, más precisamente "Si usted tiene la voluntad" (aunque esto último en español no se usa).

Por ejemplo "Will you help me?" no quiere decir "¿Me ayudarás?", sino más bien "¿Me podrías ayudar?" o, más literalmente (aunque no se usa) "¿Tienes la voluntad de ayudarme?"

Es decir que "If you will allow me..." sería, literalmente, "Si usted tiene la voluntad de permitirme..." o, en una forma menos literal pero más usual en español, "Si usted me permite..."


----------



## Avispero

Hola Dilema

I think "si es que" is it's own little phrase and would usually be : that's if 

I'll take my holidays in august, that's if I've had my knee done beforehand.
When we go out for lunch, it's always you who pays, next time I'll be the one who pays, that's if I don't forget my wallet

un saludo


----------



## dilema

Avispero said:


> Hola Dilema
> 
> I think "si es que" is it's own little phrase and would usually be : that's if
> 
> I'll take my holidays in august, that's if I've had my knee done beforehand.
> When we go out for lunch, it's always you who pays, next time I'll be the one who pays, that's if I don't forget my wallet
> 
> un saludo


Thanks!!


----------



## autrex2811

dilema said:


> Hello all,
> 
> A few days ago I run into a conditional with future tense in the "if" clause (I don't remember the example, sorry). At the moment, I didn't quite understan why that tense was used but now I wonder if it may be the equivalente to our Spanish "si es que [finalmente] + verbo" (which just emphasizes a bit the more neutral "si + verbo"). For example, would it be ok to say:
> 
> 
> 
> Pediré las vacaciones en agosto, si es que me operan de la rodilla antes --> I'll take my holidays in August, if I'll have my knee operated on before
> Siempre pagas tú cuando salimos a comer. La próxima pago yo, si es que no vuelvo a olvidarme la cartera --> When we go out for lunch, it's always you who pays. Next time, it'll be me who pays, if I won't forget again my wallet.
> 
> Thanks.



I've been recommended by native English-teachers *not say*: 'If I'll have my knee..., I'll take my holidays' but: '*If I had* my knee..., I would take my holidays', using the *second conditional 

Or

If I have my knee..., I will take my holidays *(first conditional)


----------



## JennyTW

" If I had my knee......, I would...." is SECOND conditoonal. "If I have my knee.... , I will ...." is FIRST conditoonal and it's what you need here to refer to a future action that is possible.


----------



## autrex2811

Yes, I've made that correction.


----------



## JennyTW

The second conditional would  be correct here  if it were considered unlikely that my knee were to be operated on before August.  

Things  get more complicated when the two clauses of the conditoonal refer to different times. This could also be considered the case here, so the following mixed conditional would also be possible;

"I'll take my hollidays in August, if I've had my knee operated on before "


----------



## JennyTW

"I've been recommended by my English teachers not TO say..."


----------



## autrex2811

JennyTW said:


> "I've been recommended by my English teachers not TO say..."



Hello!
Then, in this example:

The boss insisted that Sam *not be* at the meeting, it must be " The boss insisted that Sam* not to be* at the meeting".
Thanks for your help


----------



## SevenDays

dilema said:


> Hello all,
> 
> A few days ago I run into a conditional with future tense in the "if" clause (I don't remember the example, sorry). At the moment, I didn't quite understan why that tense was used but now I wonder if it may be the equivalente to our Spanish "si es que [finalmente] + verbo" (which just emphasizes a bit the more neutral "si + verbo"). For example, would it be ok to say:
> 
> 
> 
> Pediré las vacaciones en agosto, si es que me operan de la rodilla antes --> I'll take my holidays in August, if I'll have my knee operated on before
> Siempre pagas tú cuando salimos a comer. La próxima pago yo, si es que no vuelvo a olvidarme la cartera --> When we go out for lunch, it's always you who pays. Next time, it'll be me who pays, if I won't forget again my wallet.
> 
> Thanks.



The English version should be constructed just like Spanish. The main verb in the "si" clauses are in _present time_ (_*operan*_, _*vuelvo*_), and so the verbs in the equivalent "if" clauses should be in the _present_ as well: _*have* my knee operated_; _*don't* forget_. In these conditionals, the if/si clause presents a condition that "is" (habitually) or "will be" (predictive) "fulfilled" in the result clause. Generally speaking, we don't use the future in the if/si clause for two reasons: (1) If the condition is fulfilled habitually, as a matter of certainty, then the future is not used because the future always involves uncertainty; accordingly, the if/si clause and the result clause coincide in time:_ if I go to the supermarket, I buy food._ (2) If the condition makes a prediction, then the result clause is stated in future tense, because, in a time-line, the result clause follows the condition; it comes after the condition: _If I go to the supermarket, I will buy food._ 



dilema said:


> Gracias a todos por vuestras respuestas (y perdón por no aparecer antes).
> 
> Es interesante lo que apunta Jenny, aunque no recuerdo que la frase que me llamó la atención fuera de ese tipo. Así que he buscado en google frase con "if you will" y he dado con estos ejemplos, entre otros, (http://www.linguee.es/ingles-espanol/traduccion/if+you+will.html):
> 
> *If you will be staying in the country for several months, the aparthotel option is the most convenient and practical.
> **If you will allow  me, I would like to offer three examples: the first concerns the  operation of the uranium mines in Niger by European businesses*
> 
> ¿Podría entenderse, de ellos, que el futuro se usa cuando se quiere ser más formal? ¿Aporta el futuro, en casos como éstos, algún matiz que no tiene el presente?
> 
> Gracias nuevamente.



These two sentences are not like equivalent to the conditional example given by Jenny. In her example, there is a "if this, then that" relationship between the two clauses. But that's not exactly the case here. "If you will be staying" is not a "condition" for what follows; in other words, the hotel "is" most convenient and practical whether or not you decide to stay. It is a _false conditional_, a _pseudo conditional_; rather, the "if" clause simply introduces a clause that is doubtful or uncertain; it does not impose a condition on the rest of the sentence. The "if" clause could be restated as _should you stay_,_ if you choose to stay_, _if you chose to say_, etc., depending on the degree of certainty/uncertainty meant.




autrex2811 said:


> Hello!
> Then, in this example:
> 
> The boss insisted that Sam *not be* at the meeting, it must be " The boss insisted that Sam* not to be* at the meeting".
> Thanks for your help



That "be" is the subjunctive, which is expressed as the bare infinitive (without "to"). The subjunctive is governed by "insisted" and it appears in a _that-clause_. In Jenny's example, "to say" is the "to-infinitive" and not the subjunctive. Use a _that-clause_, and you can use the subjunctive: _My English teachers recommend that I say_ ~ _My English teachers recommend that I not say_. The difference in the two examples, then, is the appearance or absence of a _that-clause_, which a syntactic requirements for the subjunctive.


----------



## autrex2811

That "be" is the subjunctive, which is expressed as the bare infinitive (without "to"). The subjunctive is governed by "insisted" and it appears in a _that-clause_. In Jenny's example, "to say" is the "to-infinitive" and not the subjunctive. Use a _that-clause_, and you can use the subjunctive: _My English teachers recommend that I say_ ~ _My English teachers recommend that I not say_. The difference in the two examples, then, is the appearance or absence of a _that-clause_, which a syntactic requirements for the subjunctive.[/QUOTE]

And, how about this example, would it be correct?

I've been recommended by them _*not saying*_ that


----------



## SevenDays

It depends. "Saying" is a verb (present participle of "say"). The problem, for the reader, is determining what the subject of "saying" is, which makes a difference in the meaning of the sentence. If the subject of "saying" is "them," then the sentence, in the passive voice, means that "*I"* was the recommendation, and that "*them*" (or "*they*") made the recommendation "not saying that." If this is what you mean, then the passive sentence, in a proper semantic context, is fine. However, if the subject of "saying" is meant to be "I," then the sentence is not properly constructed. It should read: _they recommended that I not say that_, where "I" is clearly the subject of "say." The "that-clause" is needed to make the subjunctive meaning clear: a recommendation _not to say something_. There is no ambiguity; no risk of misunderstanding. (By the way, we call it a "that-clause" because the word "that" is followed by a clause, a structure with subject and predicate.) 
Cheers


----------



## autrex2811

SevenDays said:


> It depends. "Saying" is a verb (present participle of "say"). The problem, for the reader, is determining what the subject of "saying" is, which makes a difference in the meaning of the sentence. If the subject of "saying" is "them," then the sentence, in the passive voice, means that "*I"* was the recommendation, and that "*them*" (or "*they*") made the recommendation "not saying that." If this is what you mean, then the passive sentence, in a proper semantic context, is fine. However, if the subject of "saying" is meant to be "I," then the sentence is not properly constructed. It should read: _they recommended that I not say that_, where "I" is clearly the subject of "say." The "that-clause" is needed to make the subjunctive meaning clear: a recommendation _not to say something_. There is no ambiguity; no risk of misunderstanding. (By the way, we call it a "that-clause" because the word "that" is followed by a clause, a structure with subject and predicate.)
> Cheers



Yes, what I meant was this:

I've been recommended by my friends (them) not saying bad words (that), for example.
Would this example be correct?


----------



## SevenDays

Just to make sure, let's put it in active voice.
Passive: _I've been recommended by my friends not saying bad words_
Active: _My friends recommended me not saying bad words_ = _My_ _friends recommended me, and my friends did not say bad words when they recommended me_
Is this what you mean? If so, then the passive form is fine, but you can always make both versions clearer using "without" instead of "not:"_ I've been recommended by my friends without saying bad words_ ~ _My friends recommended me without saying bad words. _The passive voice sometimes tends to muddle things, to bury the meaning, and when that happens it's best to use the active voice.


----------



## autrex2811

SevenDays said:


> Just to make sure, let's put it in active voice.
> Passive: _I've been recommended by my friends not saying bad words_
> Active: _My friends recommended me not saying bad words_ = _My_ _friends recommended me, and my friends did not say bad words when they recommended me_
> Is this what you mean? If so, then the passive form is fine, but you can always make both versions clearer using "without" instead of "not:"_ I've been recommended by my friends without saying bad words_ ~ _My friends recommended me without saying bad words. _The passive voice sometimes tends to muddle things, to bury the meaning, and when that happens it's best to use the active voice.



Yes. What I have meant was "My friends recommended I should not say bad words", similar to "I've been recommended by friends not saying bad words". Then, to avoid any confusion, I should say: "My friends recommended I not say bad words"


----------



## dilema

SevenDays said:


> (...)


Muchas gracias por tu extensa explicación, SevenDays . Pero mi problema no era cómo formar los condicionales. Mi problema era que me encontré un condicional "raro" (que usaba el futuro en la parte "si", rompiendo todos mis esquemas), hice una hipóstesis sobre su posible uso/significado y propuse unos ejemplos para tratar de aclarar esa hipótesis que yo estaba haciendo.

Avispero nos ha aclarado cuál sería la mejor traducción de "si es que".

La cuestión de cuándo puede/debe utilizarse el futuro en la "if clause" aún queda un poco en el aire (salvo el caso aportado por JennyTW).


----------



## echinocereus

Hi, dilema, I find this a fascinating discussion and wonder whether we might give a few simple observations on this theme to people who are learning English.  

In general in English we do NOT use future or conditional in "if" clauses.

Two exceptions:
First, if there is an intent to say, as dilema mentioned, "If THE FACT IS THAT X will do thus and such... "  I liked Gabriel's example:  "If she WILL learn the truth in some way or another.. " meaning "IF THE FACT IS THAT she will learn the truth... "

Second, use of "will" NOT to indicate futurity, but rather to indicate "WILLINGNESS" to do something RIGHT NOW.  Gabriel alluded to this with "Will you help me?" meaning "Are you willing to help me (RIGHT NOW, not in the future)."  I would likely say "¿Quieres ayudarme?" And back to the "if" clause problem, Gabriel mentioned "If you will allow me..." meaning "If YOU ARE WILLING (again RIGHT NOW) to help me..."

I also would like to make a suggestion to Eddie P. and I realize that other English speakers may well disagree with me.  He gave the Spanish example: "Si algo llegara a pasar en el futuro..." and the English translation "If something WOULD happen in the future..."  I would have said "If something HAPPENED or WERE TO HAPPEN or SHOULD happen (NOT "WOULD HAPPEN") in the future...  My teachers (long ago, I admit, so perhaps I am just "old fashioned") were fierce about using a simple past form or "were to..." or "should" and not "would" in such an "if" clause.  

Thank you, everybody, for all your interesting observations on the "if plus will" topic.


----------



## dilema

echinocereus said:


> Hi, dilema, I find this a fascinating discussion and wonder whether we might give a few simple observations on this theme to people who are learning English.
> 
> In general in English we do NOT use future or conditional in "if" clauses.
> 
> Two exceptions:
> First, if there is an intent to say, as dilema mentioned, "If THE FACT IS THAT X will do thus and such... "  I liked Gabriel's example:  "If she WILL learn the truth in some way or another.. " meaning "IF THE FACT IS THAT she will learn the truth... "
> 
> Second, use of "will" NOT to indicate futurity, but rather to indicate "WILLINGNESS" to do something RIGHT NOW.  Gabriel alluded to this with "Will you help me?" meaning "Are you willing to help me (RIGHT NOW, not in the future)."  I would likely say "¿Quieres ayudarme?" And back to the "if" clause problem, Gabriel mentioned "If you will allow me..." meaning "If YOU ARE WILLING (again RIGHT NOW) to help me..."
> 
> I also would like to make a suggestion to Eddie P. and I realize that other English speakers may well disagree with me.  He gave the Spanish example: "Si algo llegara a pasar en el futuro..." and the English translation "If something WOULD happen in the future..."  I would have said "If something HAPPENED or WERE TO HAPPEN or SHOULD happen (NOT "WOULD HAPPEN") in the future...  My teachers (long ago, I admit, so perhaps I am just "old fashioned") were fierce about using a simple past form or "were to..." or "should" and not "would" in such an "if" clause.
> 
> Thank you, everybody, for all your interesting observations on the "if plus will" topic.


Thanks a lot, echinocereus, for your clear explanation.


----------

