# Periodo ipotetico + future in the past



## scorpio2002

Hey everybody 
Before Easter holydays, I had a translation test and as our teacher loves us , she put this puzzling sentence in it:
*
"Se avessi saputo che il viaggio sarebbe stato così pericoloso, non sarei mai partito"*
That's my translation:

"If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"

Well, yesterday, she gave us our tests back, and she changed my translation into:

_"If I had known that the journey would have been so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"
_
But I must admit it sounds pretty elaborate to be an English sentence, doesn't it?

Ciao 

P.s.: I had also thought that it could've been translated this way: ""If I had known that the journey was/were so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"


----------



## Tede

Sorry to say, but your teacher is correct.  It is an elaborate sentence, but just as much so in Italian, there's a bunch of different tenses to keep track of.  Unfortunately, your other translation is incorrect as well.  I hope you didn't lose too many points!


----------



## scorpio2002

> I hope you didn't lose too many points!


Well, this time she wins... 

Anyway, cool avatar 

Ciao and thanks,
Donato


----------



## Tede

Refering to the title of your thread, this tense is also called il condizionale passato, or the past conditional.

Leiha detto ieri che *sarebbe venuta.
*_She said yesterday that she would come.

_It appears you used the future in the past form, but it actually takes the past conditional, in this case to express a past intention or wish that can no longer be fulfilled.  Future in the past is used when the action relative to the original point of view is in the future, but still in the past of the present tense.



			
				scorpio2002 said:
			
		

> Anyway, cool avatar




Thanks


----------



## scorpio2002

Well... it's not that easy  I'll try to figure that out.

Lei ha detto ieri che sarebbe venuta.
_ She said yesterday that she would come.

_What if she didn't come?

Lei ha detto ieri che sarebbe venuta, ma non si è presentata.
_She said yesterday that she would've come, but she didn't.

_Is that what you meant? Or I just got confused...


----------



## Silvia

I see a contradiction there about would come and would have come.

Also, is "I wouldn't have left" the correct translation?

non sarei mai partito = I would have never left

Is that right?


----------



## Tede

Silvia said:
			
		

> non sarei mai partito = I would have never left
> 
> Is that right?



Yes, and
non sarei partitio = I would not have left


----------



## scorpio2002

> non sarei mai partito = I would have never left


Oh, i see... I was too much concerned about the middle part... 

yet, i have to say that a native speaker told me the right one was:
"If I had known that the journey was/were so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"

I don't know why... anyway she's British.

Bye,
Donato


----------



## Silvia

Silvia said:
			
		

> non sarei mai partito = I would have never left


 Either way, you now have something to argue about with your teacher!

Quando si dice spaccare il capello in due...


----------



## Judiths

Ciao, stavo riflettendo sulle differenze tra il third conditional e il future in the past, per favore ditemi se va bene:
una frase come *avrebbe dovuto farlo *si può tradurre in tutti i due i modi a seconda del contesto, giusto? e quindi sarebbe?
- (Doveva farlo ma non l'ha fatto)--> *He should have done it.* -->third conditional
-(In futuro non li sarebbe rimasto altro che farlo)--> *He should do it.* --> future in the past
Grazie mille


----------



## london calling

Judiths said:


> Ciao, stavo riflettendo sulle differenze tra il third conditional e il future in the past, per favore ditemi se va bene:
> una frase come *avrebbe dovuto farlo *si può tradurre in tutti i due i modi a seconda del contesto, giusto? e quindi sarebbe?
> - (Doveva farlo ma non l'ha fatto)--> *He should have done it.* -->third conditional
> -(In futuro non li sarebbe rimasto altro che farlo)--> *He should do it.* --> future in the past
> Grazie mille


Intanto:

Doveva farlo ma non l'ha fatto = avrebbe dovuto farlo ma non l'ha fatto = _he should have done it  but he didn't._

La tua seconda frase in italiano è da rivedere. Comunque,  _He should do it_ (but he hasn't done it yet) = dovrebbe farlo (non l'ha fatto ancora)

Future in the past:

_He said he *would come* to my party_ - ha detto che *sarebbe venuto* alla mia festa.


----------



## giovannino

When "avrebbe dovuto farlo" has a "future in the past" meaning shouldn't it be translated as "he would have to do it"? For example, imagine this sentence in a narrative text:

_Prima o poi avrebbe dovuto dirle la verità_

_He would have to tell her the truth sooner or later_

As for scorpio's original question, Tede agreed with his teacher that 

_If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left_

is wrong, since he should have used _would have been. _
And yet I've asked a few speakers of BE and they all thought that _would be _was perfectly correct in that context


----------



## Murphy

giovannino said:


> _Prima o poi avrebbe dovuto dirle la verità_
> 
> _He would have to tell her the truth sooner or later_
> 
> As for scorpio's original question, Tede agreed with his teacher that
> 
> _If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left_
> 
> is wrong, since he should have used _would have been. _
> And yet I've asked a few speakers of BE and they all thought that _would be _was perfectly correct in that context  I was thinking exactly the same thing myself. You could also say "if I'd known the journey was going to be so dangerous..." - ie. it's a future in the past, not a third conditional. The third conditional is the final part of the sentence: "I wouldn't have left".


----------



## Alxmrphi

Can we also note that if the person *is on the holiday at the time of speaking*, then the main sentence would be correct / acceptable.



> _If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left_


----------



## giovannino

Alxmrphi said:


> Can we also note that if the person *is on the holiday at the time of speaking*, then the main sentence would be correct / acceptable.


 
Hi Alex,

Do you mean that if the person is speaking after returning home from the journey then _would have been _should be used instead of _would be_?


----------



## Alxmrphi

Yep

If I'm on holiday and there have been 5 accidents, (let's say it was a walking holiday) then I could say "_If I had known this holiday would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have arranged it!_"

Of course as soon as the holiday was over I'd have to use "would have been", and of course change this->that.


----------



## Murphy

Sorry Alex, but I disagree. Even if speaking after the holiday, I would still use "would be" in this sentence because at the time of arranging/leaving for the holiday I didn't know that it was going to be dangerous, so therefore this part of the sentence constitutes "the future in the past" and not the hypothetical situation.

If I'd known at that time (hypothetical - I didn't know) that the holiday would be/was going to be so dangerous (future in the past - the holiday was dangerous), I wouldn't have gone (3rd conditional - concludes hypothetical situation - in reality I *did* go on the holiday).


----------



## Alxmrphi

Ok, I wasn't thinking about making it the future in the past, but rather just reading the sentence contextless.

Can you clarify what you mean by still using 'would be', because it sort of seems to me that you are suggesting that 'would have been' is wrong in this sentence, which I know cannot be what you mean at all.
I'd only use 'would be' in your sentence if the tense in the main clause was "If I knew".... and not "had known"..

"If I knew (at the time) that is would be / was going to be so dangerous, I wouldn't have gone"..
That's fine for me, and so is "would have been" as well.

I think both options are alright, but I wouldn't really use 'would be', considering it's a closed action, but then again I am not in the mindset of thinking about a future in the past construction suggesting this. I suppose I'd agree with you then, because of course 'would have been' is not a future in the past.

I think I should have grasped the context of the whole _trying to write a future-in-the-past_ sentence instead of just thinking of time periods and how I'd say it without any context.
(...heads for the alcohol...)


----------



## london calling

Murphy said:


> If I'd known at that time (hypothetical - I didn't know) that the holiday would be/was going to be so dangerous (future in the past - the holiday was dangerous), I wouldn't have gone (3rd conditional - concludes hypothetical situation - in reality I *did* go on the holiday).


Ditto!


----------



## Murphy

Alxmrphi said:


> Can you clarify what you mean by still using 'would be', because it sort of seems to me that you are suggesting that 'would have been' is wrong in this sentence, which I know cannot be what you mean at all. But that is exactly what I'm suggesting...
> I'd only use 'would be' in your sentence if the tense in the main clause was "If I knew".... and not "had known"..
> 
> "If I knew (at the time) that is would be / was going to be so dangerous, I wouldn't have gone"..
> That's fine for me, and so is "would have been" as well.
> 
> I'd say:
> -*If I knew* it would be/was going to be dangerous, *I wouldn't go.*
> -*If I had known* it would be/was going to be dangerous, *I wouldn't have gone...*
> 
> The phrases in bold should agree (2nd and 3rd conditional - hypothetical situations) but the phrase in the middle, which represents the future in the past, is independent.
> I think I should have grasped the context of the whole _trying to write a future-in-the-past_ sentence instead of just thinking of time periods and how I'd say it without any context.
> (...heads for the alcohol...) I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me now, but then I've also had a drink with dinner...cheers


----------



## ALEX1981X

Sorry guys

Can this sentence - *If I knew* it would be/was going to be dangerous, *I wouldn't go.** have a "past meaning" ?

I'll try to explain

1) If I knew (that day, past action ???) it would be /was going to be dangerous (future in the past) , I wouldn't go .
It doesn't seem right to me in order to describe  something happened in the past. Much better the past perfect . I tend to see "If I knew" capable of expressing something hypothetical in the present

2) If I knew (just now) it would be dangerous (now or in the next future), I wouldn't go (now)

Please enlighten me natives thanks
*


----------



## london calling

Non mi è chiaro come lo vorresti tradurre in Italiano. Diversamente è una domanda per English Only.


----------



## ALEX1981X

In Italiano corretto a mio avviso sarebbe : se avessi saputo (allora) che sarebbe stato pericoloso (future in the past) non ci sarei andato (conseguenza)

In italiano scorretto o forse molto colloquiale sarebbe : 
se* sapevo* che sarebbe stato pericoloso non ci sarei andato/ non ci *andavo*
se *sapevo *che *era* pericoloso non ci *andavo* 

In Inglese invece l'unica che mi sembra corretta per esprimere la frase inizialmente proposta è :



*If I had known* it would be/was going to be dangerous, *I wouldn't have gone... 

**L'altra versione con "If I knew" la vedrei corretta in uno scenario attuale ossia "a oggi" e non parlando del passato

If I knew = Se sapessi (now)

**Come la vedi London ??*


----------



## london calling

_If I had known it was going to be dangerous I wouldn't have gone
_Se avvessi saputo che sarebbe stato pericoloso non ci sarei andato

_If I knew it was dangerous I wouldn't go
_Se sapessi che fosse pericoloso non ci andrei.

S'intende se sapessi di sicuro che fosse pericoloso, non ci andrei. Tipo:  "Macché, mi hai preso per scemo? E' chiaro che non ci andrei se risultasse pericoloso".


----------



## ALEX1981X

OK Lo

Quindi concordi con me che il past perfect è l'unico (in questo contesto) in grado di esprimere la frase proposta che è al passato.

Mi è venuto un dubbio perche per un momento leggendo gli ultimi post , ho pensato che "If I knew"  potesse avere il significato di "Se avessi saputo" (If I had known)


----------



## EnglishRobin

scorpio2002 said:


> Hey everybody
> Before Easter holydays, I had a translation test and as our teacher loves us , she put this puzzling sentence in it:
> *
> "Se avessi saputo che il viaggio sarebbe stato così pericoloso, non sarei mai partito"*
> That's my translation:
> 
> "If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"
> 
> Well, yesterday, she gave us our tests back, and she changed my translation into:
> 
> _"If I had known that the journey would have been so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"
> _
> But I must admit it sounds pretty elaborate to be an English sentence, doesn't it?
> 
> Ciao
> 
> P.s.: I had also thought that it could've been translated this way: ""If I had known that the journey was/were so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"



I realize this is an old post but this topic is so important. English grammar in the past is challenging...even for native English speakers. You were perfectly right with your answer, "If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, Ii wouldn't have left." (the journey was SURE to be dangerous.)  You can say, "If I had known that the journey was so dangerous (an established fact), I wouldn't have left."  Personally, without reflection, I would naturally say, "If I had known that the journey was going to be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left." 

"If I knew, I wouldn't have gone." non va. Si deve dire invece, "If I had known (before I went on the trip), I wouldn't have gone."   Past Perfect: Un'azzione nel passato che accade prima di un'altra azzione. 

In quei giorni noto quardando la TV americana che gli americani usano spesso il Past Perfect invece del Simple Past. Dicono per esempio: "I had gone to my friends' yesterday for dinner." invece di, "I went to my friends'..." Uno studente spagnolo mi ha dato una spegazione. Mi ha detto che si usa il Past Perfect piuttosto che il Simple Past nella lingua spagnola. Pensa che lo sbaglio stia svillupando a cause dell'influenza dello spagnolo sulla lingua inglese perché ce ne sono tanti spagnoli nel USA. 

Un'altro sbaglio che fanno mai 'Speakers of English as a second language' ma fanno spesso gli 'English mother tongue speakers è il seguente:  "If I would have known that it did that, I wouldn't have used it." Ma tanti Ingesi dicono questo tipo di frase. È orrendo! 

Direi: "If I knew (hypothetically / replacing 'were to know') that that route is so dangerous..."

Ciao!

Robin
Montreal, Canada


----------



## davidforth

la confusione avviene perchè nell'inglese parlato si utilizza pochissimo, nelle ipotetiche, il terzo tipo. 
In più e più occasioni nei tv shows ho riscontrato come nella traduzione italiana il tempo era sempre più remoto del tempo realmente utilizzato in English. Esempio: "If I knew it I would do that" riferito ad una cosa passata, veniva tradotto con: "l'avessi saputo l'avrei fatto", e non come "se lo sapessi lo farei". Nello schema dell'ipotetica del 3 tipo, la struttura è: "past perfect + past conditional" per questo non so quanto sia grammaticalmente corretta la traduzione: ""If I had known that the journey was/were so dangerous, I wouldn't have left" . Non è una duration form dove trattiamo situazioni conseguenziali dove quindi il past perfect è accompagnato dal simple past. Non lo so, la regola dice una cosa il "sound" un'altra. I'm confused, a bit  Noto che l'inglese mediamente è più legato alla correttezza "sonora" della frase, più che alla sua scrittura. Mi sbaglio Natives?


----------



## Teerex51

Hi Robin and David—just to make things even more complicated—let me post a couple of sentences that may (or may not ) help:


_If I knew how to do it, I wouldn't be asking you _(_Knew_ here is the infamous subjunctive mood_ – not a "proper" past tense indicating a past event –_ which comes into play when the clause describes a doubtful, unlikely, hypothetical situation in the present). The same applies to such sentences as _if pigs could fly _(today, not yesterday or last year)
_If I met him, I wouldn't know him from Adam_ (again, subjunctive mood)
_If I met him, I have no memory of it_ (plain old past tense, stating a real possibility)
David is right in saying that getting the tense right is a matter of ear (that's what you mean by "sound", right?), but even native speakers occasionally botch their tense harmony and "backshifting". This often has to do with hearing ungrammatical use of English and slowly getting used to it, _don't it? _


----------



## davidforth

_"If I met him, I have no memory of it", _*shouldn't be*_ "If I meet him, I have no memory of it?"_(primo tipo)_ it drives me crazy!  
by the way, of course it "don't"  _


----------



## Teerex51

davidforth said:


> _"If I met him, I have no memory of it", _*shouldn't be*_ "If I meet him, I have no memory of it?"_(primo tipo)_ it drives me crazy!
> _



No David, it means: _se l'ho (mai) incontrato non me lo ricordo. _ 

Let me throw you another curveball or two: 


_If I meet him, I won't recognize him
_
_If he was lost, he should have said so_


----------



## davidforth

Ah ok ok, ora ho capito, è una falsa "If clauses". 
_If I meet him, I won't recognize him_. Questa è semplice. Ipotetica del primo tipo.
_If he was lost, he should have said so._ Questa l'avrei fatta secondo lo schema: past perfect-past conditional, e cioè If he'd been lost, he should have said so.
Ma sicuramente mi freghi, perchè se l'hai scritto, hai già la soluzione


----------



## Teerex51

davidforth said:


> _If he was lost, he should have said so._ Questa l'avrei fatta secondo lo schema: past perfect-past conditional, e cioè If he'd been lost, he should have said so.


No trick question.  Just a case where the subjunctive would have been unwarranted.


----------



## davidforth

Teerex51 said:


> No trick question.  Just a case where the subjunctive would have been unwarranted.



Perchè ingiustificato? "si fosse perso, l'avrebbe detto". 
Non so se esiste una regola vera e propria, nel caso me ne scuso,ma fosse come dici tu, anche con il verbo to born, dovrebbe funzionare così, ed invece più volte vedo scritto "have been born". Come faccio a comprendere in quale occasione il congiuntivo è più o meno lecito?


----------



## Teerex51

davidforth said:


> Perchè ingiustificato? "si fosse perso, l'avrebbe detto".
> Non so se esiste una regola vera e propria, nel caso me ne scuso,ma fosse come dici tu, anche con il verbo to born, dovrebbe funzionare così, ed invece più volte vedo scritto "have been born". Come faccio a comprendere in quale occasione il congiuntivo è più o meno lecito?


_Se si era perso doveva dirlo. _In altre parole:_ si era perso [un fatto, non un'ipotesi] ma non l'aveva detto/ammesso._ Quindi niente congiuntivo.

E non c'è un verbo _to born_. C'è il verbo _to bear. _


----------



## davidforth

Teerex51 said:


> _Se si era perso doveva dirlo. _In altre parole:_ si era perso [un fatto, non un'ipotesi] ma non l'aveva detto/ammesso._ Quindi niente congiuntivo.
> 
> E non c'è un verbo _to born_. C'è il verbo _to bear. _



A parte i miei errori elementari, visto il raro utilizzo se non nelle forme al past participle, e con altro significano, questa "furbata" gioca sulla doppia possibile traduzione in italiano dei verbi composti tipo appunto: should have said so, che noi traduciamo con "doveva dirlo", quando in realtà andrebbe tradotto con "avrebbe dovuto dirlo", questo in inglese ci fa confondere con una falsa "if clause", e quindi i polli come me ci cascano  se avessi scritto: If he got/was lost, he had to say so allora non mi sarei confuso.  Un'altro indizio: il congiuntivo va messo nella forma di "were" ma siccome spesso nel parlato si sostituisce con was, ecco un'altro tranello! 
I can't "bear" such messed up things


----------



## Luca Tufo

scorpio2002 said:


> Hey everybody
> Before Easter holydays, I had a translation test and as our teacher loves us , she put this puzzling sentence in it:
> 
> *"Se avessi saputo che il viaggio sarebbe stato così pericoloso, non sarei mai partito"*
> That's my translation:
> 
> "If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"
> 
> Well, yesterday, she gave us our tests back, and she changed my translation into:
> 
> _"If I had known that the journey would have been so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"_
> 
> But I must admit it sounds pretty elaborate to be an English sentence, doesn't it?
> 
> Ciao
> 
> P.s.: I had also thought that it could've been translated this way: ""If I had known that the journey was/were so dangerous, I wouldn't have left"



I'm running late but I'd like to give my 2 cents on this:
Had I known the trip was gonna be that dangerous, I wouldn't have ever left.


----------



## Einstein

Luca Tufo said:


> I'm running late but I'd like to give my 2 cents on this:
> Had I known the trip was gonna be that dangerous, I wouldn't have ever left.


"Had I known" is correct but rather formal; I think I would use it only in writing. "Was going to be" is a possible alternative to "would be". However, "gonna" is very informal and doesn't fit with the formal beginning..
Lastly, the adverb is not in the most natural position; I'd say "I would never have left".

Looking back at the beginning of the thread, I think Scorpio's first attempt was perfect and the teacher was wrong - she had probably been in Italy too long  (but I disagree with the second attempt).


----------



## AnOnlineEntity

Hi guys,

Maybe it is different here in Australia, but to me, 'Had I known...' doesn't sound formal, I could easily imagine myself saying it to my wife/kids etc. 

But I agree 100% with you, Einstein, the original phrase of "If I had known that the journey would be so dangerous, I wouldn't have left" is completely correct and the most common way I hear it said in everyday life.

Cheers,
AOE


----------



## Luca Tufo

Einstein said:


> "Had I known" is correct but rather formal; I think I would use it only in writing. "Was going to be" is a possible alternative to "would be". However, "gonna" is very informal and doesn't fit with the formal beginning..
> Lastly, the adverb is not in the most natural position; I'd say "I would never have left".
> 
> Looking back at the beginning of the thread, I think Scorpio's first attempt was perfect and the teacher was wrong - she had probably been in Italy too long  (but I disagree with the second attempt).


To my ears it's not. I've always heard youtubers use inversion and slang words after it.


----------



## Paulfromitaly

Luca Tufo said:


> I've always heard* youtubers* use inversion and slang words after it


Beh, ubi maior..


----------



## italtrav

Paulfromitaly said:


> Beh, ubi maior..


I'd agree that "Had I known..." is a bit more formal than "If I'd known...," but only a slight degree more. Both strike me as well within the bounds of ordinary spoken English.


----------

