# If I <didn't kill> him, he was going to keep me



## Phoebe1200

_NCIS
A girl who was kidnapped saves herself by killing her kidnapper, and this is what she says to the authorities.
_


              If I *didn't kill *him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet.


I'm a little confused about this sentence. Shouldn't it be "_If I *hadn't killed* him_..."?


----------



## e2efour

_If I didn't kill him/Unless I killed him_ describes what your thoughts were before you killed the kidnapper.
You would actually say to yourself: _Unless I kill him, he's going to keep me as a pet._


----------



## Phoebe1200

e2efour said:


> _If I didn't kill him/Unless I killed him_ describes what your thoughts were before you killed the kidnapper.
> You would actually say to yourself: _Unless I kill him, he's going to keep me as a pet._


Thank you very much!

But isn't it odd to use the OP sentence like that?      Shouldn't at least "I thought" precede?


----------



## Florentia52

Phoebe1200 said:


> Thank you very much!
> 
> But isn't it odd to use the OP sentence like that?      Shouldn't at least "I thought" precede?


You could add "I thought..." at the beginning of the sentence if you wanted to weaken its impact. It's not odd without it.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Please tell me how the following sentence is different from the OP.

_
 If I* hadn't killed *him, he *would have kept* me like a pet._


----------



## e2efour

_If I hadn't killed him_ makes it more likely that you killed him.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Sorry, I don't understand.


----------



## Barque

Try reading it with e2efour's post #2. 

What the girl actually said (as quoted by you in your OP) was what she probably thought to herself _before _killing the kidnapper.
On the other hand, "If I hadn't killed him..." sounds like something that might be said _after_ the killing.


----------



## Phoebe1200

But she did say it _after_ the killing.


----------



## se16teddy

Reported speech is not always signalled by _I thought to myself_ or _He didn't know _or _I felt_ or any other similar fanfare. We often* rely on the tense alone* to signal that we are reporting what was thought or said at the time.

Direct speech:_ I thought to myself "If I don't kill him he is going to keep me as a pet"._
Indirect speech:_ If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me as a pet._


----------



## Phoebe1200

And if instead of "was going to" was "would":

"_If I didn't kill him, he *would *keep me as a pet_"

Does it change anything?


----------



## se16teddy

The difference is the difference between 
1. _He will keep me as a pet._
2. _He is going to keep me as a pet. 
_
The differences are subtle and not everyone perceives them in the same way. For me, 1 is a relatively formal and dispassionate prediction, and 2 is relatively informal and emotive, suggesting here perhaps immediacy, indignation or fear.


----------



## Phoebe1200

So, you're saying that the OP could have been said with "would": "_If I didn't kill him, he *would *keep me as a pet_" and still be considered as what was thought before the incident?


----------



## se16teddy

_If I didn't kill him, he would keep me as a pet._
This sentence has various possible interpretations, including
_I kill him every day. If I didn't do this, he would keep me as a pet. _
In the context, is this a possibility?


----------



## Phoebe1200

se16teddy said:


> _I kill him every day. If I didn't do this, he would keep me as a pet. _
> In the context, is this a possibility?


No, it's not.


I should have put it in the OP but here is what she said just before the OP sentence:

_I was kidnapped by a psychopath, held hostage, brought to Moscow. If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet.

_
I wonder if it changes anything for you regarding the OP sentence structure being what was thought before the incident?


----------



## se16teddy

The additional sentence makes it clear that the context is a narrative about the past. It leads us to expect more about the past, such as direct or indirect speech.


----------



## Phoebe1200

So, it doesn't change anything?  
I mean, you're still saying that _"If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet" _or even with "would" _If I didn't kill him, he *would *keep me. Like a pet" _
is what was thought at the time?


----------



## se16teddy

Phoebe1200 said:


> So, it doesn't change anything?


It changes a lot. The sentence of #1 is confusing in isolation. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to work out that the only possible interpretation is indirect speech. The context of #15 prepares us.


----------



## Phoebe1200

I'm so sorry I didn't include it in the OP. 
Could you please tell me what it changes?


----------



## VicNicSor

It's probably just me, but it looks like a mistake to me, not like an implied indirect speech. The girl's speech definitely just conveys a simple sequence of events in the past, a narrative. There were two possible scenarios:

_I was kidnapped by a psychopath, held hostage, brought to Moscow. He *was going *to keep me. Like a pet. So I *killed *him.  _
or
_I was kidnapped by a psychopath, held hostage, brought to Moscow.  If I hadn't killed him, he would have kept me. Like a pet.
_
... and she said something in between...


----------



## Phoebe1200

se16teddy said:


> It changes a lot. The sentence of #1 is confusing in isolation. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to work out that the only possible interpretation is indirect speech. The context of #15 prepares us.


If you could please tell me what it changes.


----------



## Oddmania

The problem with "_If I didn't kill him, he would keep me_" is that it looks like a standard 'If I did this, that would be the result' kind of conditional sentence, about a *future* event.

_If I killed someone, I *would *be in trouble with the law_ → speculative.
_If I didn't kill him, he *was going to* keep me. What was I supposed to do?_ → past.​Using "_would_" instead of "_was going to_" would make the whole thing pretty hard to work out.


----------



## Phoebe1200

_


Oddmania said:



			The problem with "If I didn't kill him, he would keep me" is that it looks like a standard 'If I did this, that would be the result' kind of conditional sentence, about a *future* event.
		
Click to expand...

_


Oddmania said:


> _If I killed someone, I *would *be in trouble with the law → speculative.
> If I didn't kill him, he *was going to* keep me. What was I supposed to do? → past.
> _​Using "would" instead of "was going to" would make the whole thing pretty hard to work out.


_OK, I understand this part._


But this sentence "_If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet"_ is a very strange use for me. 

If it had "*I knew*" in front of it, then it would be perfectly fine_ "*I knew *if  I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet"_ 
And without_ "I knew"_, it just doesn't make any sense to me.


----------



## RedwoodGrove

If I don't kill him, he is going to keep me. (present tense)
If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. (past tense)

It's a mixed-verb-tense sentence. The first clause is the conditional, the second is the indicative mood.


----------



## e2efour

Suppose you went on holiday to Paris. Before you went away, your intention was to stay there for a week unless it rained.
Your idea before you go is _I intend to stay there unless it rains._
After you return home, you describe what happened to a friend.
You say "I was going to stay there for a week unless it rained. Unfortunately, it did, so I decided to come home early."

The sentence could be written "If it didn't rain, I was going to stay there for a week."  At this point your friend does not know whether or not it rained.
What's the problem? 

I would use _unless_ rather than _if + not_ here and in your original sentence.


----------



## RedwoodGrove

Admittedly, there are better choices of verb tenses, but this is how people talk.


----------



## VicNicSor

e2efour said:


> You say "I was going to stay there for a week unless it rained. Unfortunately, it did, so I decided to come home early."


This is different. Your intention depends on whether it rains or not. In the OP, the criminal's intention was not conditioned by anything. He didn't think "I'm going to keep her unless she kills me" So, your sentence is more like a conditional.
If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. -- the red part is the *reason *why she killed him. (He was going to kill me so I killed him)
If it didn't rain, I was going to stay there for a week. -- the red part is an *intention*. (I was going to stay there for a week so it rained)


e2efour said:


> The sentence could be written "If it didn't rain, I was going to stay there for a week." At this point your friend does not know whether or not it rained.
> What's the problem?
> 
> I would use _unless_ rather than _if + not_ here and in your original sentence.


Yes, I think that "I was going to stay there for a week *unless it rained*." sounds much better. Or "I was going to stay there for a week, *but *it rained." Because if it did rain, and you, talking about that time in the past, start the sentence with "if it didn't rain" instead of "if it hadn't rained" -- it still looks strange to me. Maybe it's just me. And in the OP, it looks even stranger.


----------



## Phoebe1200

VicNicSor said:


> it still looks strange to me. Maybe it's just me. And in the OP, it looks even stranger.


Same here.




Phoebe1200 said:


> If it had "*I knew*" in front of it, then it would be perfectly fine_ "*I knew *if I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet"_


What do you think about this?


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> _ "*I knew *if  I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me. Like a pet"_





Phoebe1200 said:


> What do you think about this?


That is fine with me. 

In the original (without the "I knew") I read the sentence as having "I knew" but elided and understood from the story-telling context.


----------



## e2efour

There is absolutely nothing strange about or wrong with the original sentence.

The past tense (_if I didn't kill him_) is used because the speaker is talking about the past. It says nothing about whether or not she killed her kidnapper since it refers to the time *before* she killed him.

If she had said instead _If I hadn't killed him_, we could infer from that she killed him. But we know that already from the context.

There is no need to put _I thought_ or _I knew_ in front of the sentence. She is simply describing what she was thinking at the time.


----------



## VicNicSor

I just watched the scene -- the angry girl tells the OP line to a man who was considered her father, and that's why she was kidnapped. And she hates him. By this line she blames him for being the reason why she could have been kept like a pet. Putting the grammar aside, in this context, her describing her thoughts (rather than actions) would sound too sentimental to me


----------



## Oddmania

There's nothing sentimental about the sentence, really. In my opinion, this isn't a matter of _feelings _as much as it is a matter of _process _and _perspective_. If she said "_If I hadn't killed him_...",
that would mean she's got the whole thing processed in her brain. She's dealt with the murder she's commited, she's through with the psychological process, and she says "_Okay, I did it. But if I hadn't done it, he would have kept me_".

"_If I didn't kill him, he was going to_..." doesn't come across as cold as the other version does. The perspective isn't set _after _the crime. The sentence describes the scene while it was happening.

_If I don't kill him right now, he is going to... → If I didn't kill him right then, at that point, he was going to...
_​To quote e2efour, it says nothing whether or not she killed the man. Hence, as a regular person who has just commited a crime, you're much more likely to say "_If I didn't kill him, he was going to..._" than "_If I hadn't killed him, he would have..._". It might sound like a very minor detail, but I actually think the words were very well chosen by the screenwriter. For instance, if you were being questioned by the police and you told them "_Look, if I hadn't killed, he would have..._", a very well trained psychologist might see in it some sort of irrational 'collectedness', as if you had taken the time to collect your thoughts before speaking, instead of being panicked and confused by what's happening to you.

As a sidenote, it's not uncommon (albeit admittedly conversational) to use the past tense to talk about things that _would have_ happened otherwise. For instance, "_In another ten minutes, I was a goner!_" (instead of "_Another ten minutes and I would be dead!_").


----------



## VicNicSor

I understand your point but I don't see it this way. I don't like (or don't understand) several things about the OP.

Suppose the implied direct speech is "If I *don't* kill him, he *is going* to keep me as a pet." This already doesn't look very good to me because it's not a true conditional sentence like "If I *don't* kill him, he *will *keep me as a pet." Because "is going to keep" is the criminal's intention, while "will keep" is a result.

Why couldn't we suppose she meant "if I hadn't" by "if I didn't"? People sometimes do that in casual speech, don't they? "If I *hadn't *killed him, he *was going* to keep me." would sound better to me than the original.

And again, returning to your post, OM, in the movie (I've watched the scene), she looks more like a "cold", "if-I-hadn't" girl, than a "panicked and confused" "if-I-didn't" girl. So even if she'd said _"*I knew *if I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me like a pet"_ it would look a bit odd to me in this scene.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Is this version possible?


_"If I *hadn't killed* him, he *was going to* keep me. Like a pet" _​


----------



## JulianStuart

VicNicSor said:


> "If I *hadn't *killed him, he *was going* to keep me." would sound better to me than the original.





Phoebe1200 said:


> Is this version possible?
> _"If I *hadn't killed* him, he *was going to* keep me. Like a pet" _​


----------



## Phoebe1200

Are you saying that it's possible to use "*If I hadn't*" and "*was going to*" in one sentence?


----------



## Oddmania

VicNicSor said:


> Suppose the implied direct speech is "If I *don't* kill him, he *is going* to keep me as a pet." This already doesn't look very good to me because it's not a true conditional sentence like "If I *don't* kill him, he *will *keep me as a pet."


But it doesn't have to be a 'true conditional sentence' to be correct. You can say "_If I don't, you can..._" or "_If I don't, you should..._" or "_If I don't, he is going to_...".


VicNicSor said:


> Because "is going to keep" is the criminal's intention, while "will keep" is a result.


I don't understand it that way. To me, "_He is _(or_ was_)_ going to keep me_" is more of a prediction about the future, much like "_He's going to be a great president_" or "_It's going to be interesting_".


VicNicSor said:


> Why couldn't we suppose she meant "if I hadn't" by "if I didn't"? People sometimes do that in casual speech, don't they? "If I *hadn't *killed him, he *was going* to keep me." would sound better to me than the original.


That definitely 100% doesn't work. If the first verb is "_If I hadn't_...", the second one should be "_he would have_..." or "_he might have_..." or "_he could have_...", etc.


----------



## VicNicSor

Oddmania said:


> But it doesn't have to be a 'true conditional sentence' to be correct. You can say "_If I don't, you can..._" or "_If I don't, you should..._" or "_If I don't, he is going to_...".


But I didn't say only "will" worked. Moreover, e2e4's sentence -- "If it *didn't *rain, I *was going to* stay there for a week." -- worked to me too, because it's diffrent from the OP. The speaker's intention depends on the rain.


Oddmania said:


> I don't understand it that way. To me, "_He is _(or_ was_)_ going to keep me_" is more of a prediction about the future, much like "_He's going to be a great president_" or "_It's going to be interesting_".


I see what you mean, but I think it's a different meaning of "be going to", and everyone here, as I remember, talked about an intention rather than about a prediction.


Oddmania said:


> That definitely 100% doesn't work. If the first verb is "_If I hadn't_...", the second one should be "_he would have_..." or "_he might have_..." or "_he could have_...", etc.


Yes, that would not be really grammatical, but would it work as sloppy speech or slip of the tongue? As I said, "he was going to kill me" is, as I think", his intention, not a "result". Besides, "If I hadn't killed him, he *would have been going* *to *kill me" -- sounds a bit too wordy, doesn't it?


----------



## Oddmania

I think you're going about it backwards. You're trying to change the sentence accordingly to what you think is true. You're saying "_She's talking about her kidnapper's intentions, so she should have said that_". A more logical approach would be for you to think "_The screenwriter wrote that, so the meaning must be this_".

I'm just trying to help Phoebe1200 get her head around the grammar and help her work out why a native speaker might want to say "_If I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me_" instead of "_If I hadn't killed him, he would have kept me_".

There's no way anyone would say "If I hadn't killed him, he was going to...", so I don't think it's really worth reading into too much. The only way to make it work would be to split the sentence in half: "_If I hadn't killed him--- I mean, he was going to keep me anyway. What was I supposed to do?_".


----------



## VicNicSor

Oddmania said:


> "_If I hadn't killed him*--- I mean,* he was going to keep me anyway. What was I supposed to do?_".


I was thinking about something like that by the way -- she's making a pause there: "_If I didn't killed Karposev... he was going to keep me, like a pet_."

All I tried to do was to figure out how the OP could mean "_If I *hadn't killed* him, he ...." _rather than "_I_ _*knew/thought that*_ _*If I didn't kill* him, he  ...._", because, IMO, the former fitted the context much better...


----------



## Oddmania

This is exactly what's wrong in your reasoning: it _doesn't_ fit the context any better. What the sentence was meant to mean precisely is "_(I figured) if I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me_", or "_He was going to keep me unless I killed him_". It doesn't need changing. If you change the tenses, you alter the perspective or the 'frame' that the speaker created in the first place. This is a perfectly valid sentence, this is how people talk. Just google it:

"I didn't have a Plan B, and if I didn't make it I was going to struggle." - Trevor Sinclair.
"If I didn't get my shit together, I was going to be a statistic." - Shantell House.​


----------



## VicNicSor

Oddmania said:


> This is exactly what's wrong in your reasoning: it _doesn't_ fit the context any better. What the sentence was meant to mean precisely is "_(I figured) if I didn't kill him, he was going to keep me_", or "_He was going to keep me unless I killed him_". It doesn't need changing. If you change the tenses, you alter the perspective or the 'frame' that the speaker created in the first place. This is a perfectly valid sentence, this is how people talk. Just google it:
> 
> "I didn't have a Plan B, and if I didn't make it I was going to struggle." - Trevor Sinclair.
> "If I didn't get my shit together, I was going to be a statistic." - Shantell House.​


Good examples, thanks! Now I see how it works in the right context.


> "Shantell "Shay" House knows that throughout her life, the odds have been against her. "I've been in foster care since the age of two," she explains. "*If I didn't get my shit together, I was going to become a statistic.*" Never adopted, House moved into her own apartment at age 16."





> The love of the game. At school, teachers used to grab me and say there was more to life that just football. To me, there wasn't. I didn't have a Plan B and *if I didn't make it I was going to struggle*. I owe it so much.


But, the OP context to me still doesn't look suitable for this

By the way, the title of the article is " ... If I hadn't made it, I'd have struggled ...."
An email conversation with Trevor Sinclair: 'I didn't have a Plan B.

I'm wondering, doesn't that mean that this pattern is colloquial/informal, and they replaced the direct speech with something more grammatical in the title?


----------



## Phoebe1200

VicNicSor said:


> e2e4's sentence -- "If it *didn't *rain, I *was going to* stay there for a week." -- worked to me too, because it's diffrent from the OP.


Why are you OK with this? How's it different?


----------



## VicNicSor

Phoebe1200 said:


> Why are you OK with this? How's it different?


I described it in detail in the first half of my post #27.


----------



## Phoebe1200

VicNicSor said:


> I described it in detail in the first half of my post #27.


Sorry, although I still don't get it.

Is this version possible?


_If I *didn't kill* him, he *would have kept* me. Like a pet_​


----------



## Cagey

No, it doesn't work because 'would have' is the tense we use in a contrary-to-fact conditional, and for that we need "If I hadn't killed him."

As people have said above, the original sentence is reported speech/thought. It may be challenging to learners to recognize it without an inserted 'I thought' but native speakers recognize it because of the tenses used.  In normal speech, people slip in and out of these constructions without clearly marking them with 'I thought / I knew that' and so on.  

We can't review all the alternative ways of expressing this idea, and explain why the speaker didn't use them.  The current sentence is entirely natural in ordinary speech.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thank you!

And does it only work with "is/was going to" in the sentence?


----------



## Phoebe1200

OK, I think I'm starting to accept that the original sentence is reported speech/thought. I'm going to have to pay more attention to such structures. But for now, I still have some questions left. 

Can the first part be positive and the second negative? Or is it always like this:_
_
_negative              positive   _​_"If I *didn't *kill him, he *was going to* keep me. Like a pet" 
"If it *didn't* rain, I* was going to* stay there for a week."
_
And can it be said like this: _I was going to stay there for a week if it didn't rain._
_He was going to keep me as a pet, if I didn't kill him._​


----------



## Phoebe1200

Since both these mean the same except for the fact that the first sentence describes the thought _before_ something happens while the second the thought_ after_ something happens:

1) _If I* didn't kill *him, he *was going to* keep me like a pet._
2) _If I* hadn't killed *him, he *would have kept* me like a pet._


Does it mean that the following sentences could be reversed into sentences expressing thoughts before something happens, too?


_If you *had studied* harder you *would have passed* the exam. If I *studied *harder, I *was going to *pass the exam.

If we *had taken* a taxi, we *wouldn't have missed* the plane. If we *took* a taxi, we *weren't going to *miss the plane.

If I *had won* the lottery, I *would have bought* a car. If I *won *the lottery, I *was going to* buy a car.

If they *had not passed* their exam, their teacher *would have been *sad. If they* didn't pass* the exam, the teacher *was going to* be sad.

If I *had seen *Mary, I *would have told* her. If I* saw *Mary, I *was going to* tell her._


----------



## Cagey

All the second versions _*in green*_ could be understood as reports of your thoughts before you acted, depending on the context.  They don't tell us whether or not you actually _studied harder, took a taxi_, etc.  Other things in the context would tell us that.

All the _had / would_ versions are conter-factual conditionals.  They imply that you didn't_ study harder, take a taxi_, and so on.

The original question about the use of 'didn't' has been answered to the best of our ability. 





Phoebe1200 said:


> Shouldn't it be "_If I *hadn't killed* him_..."?


 Discussion of other possible wordings are taking us off topic, and are of limited usefulness.

I am closing this thread. 

Cagey, moderator


----------

