The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Will the exercise help the students to understand Type 2? Options
DavidLearn
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 6:58:15 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/27/2014
Posts: 2,927
Neurons: 20,885
Location: Girona, Catalonia, Spain
Hi teachers,
The question is taking from the movie 100 Feet. That said, I've asked seven questions, using conditional sentences type 2, from a segment of the movie.
Will the exercise help my students to understand the questions and answers? The following is just an example:

What would happen if she crossed the 100 foot perimeter?
An alarm would activate.
What kind of conditional sentences are they?
They are conditional sentences type 2.
Why is that?
Because it’s asking about an imaginary situation and answering with its imaginary result.

Thanks.
BHUDSON
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:04:07 AM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 3/19/2017
Posts: 4
Neurons: 1,103
Location: Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden
Because the alarm is mechanical, the result of the condition is inevitable. There is no voluntary quality to it. Once she chooses to cross the perimeter, the alarm WILL go off. Even though "would" is used in the second clause, it means "is certain to," so I say this is first conditional. Am I wrong? In any case, because of this complication, it might not be the best example to use.
Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:20:22 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/13/2015
Posts: 487
Neurons: 105,779
Location: Dzerzhinskiy, Moskovskaya, Russia
BHUDSON wrote:
Once she chooses to cross the perimeter, the alarm WILL go off.
...
so I say this is first conditional.

Yours is the first conditional. The original poster's is not. But I would not say it is the second conditional either. The second conditional is about unreal situations in the present which it is not. It can have the future meaning as you presented it or the past meaning - whenever she crossed the perimeter the alarm would go off - depending on the context.
tunaafi
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:28:42 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,869
Neurons: 50,879
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
BHUDSON wrote:
Because the alarm is mechanical, the result of the condition is inevitable. There is no voluntary quality to it. Once she chooses to cross the perimeter, the alarm WILL go off. Even though "would" is used in the second clause, it means "is certain to," so I say this is first conditional. Am I wrong?


Yes.

The hypothetical part is her crossing the perimeter. The possibility of the alarm going off becomes a certainty only in the event of her actually crossing.

TWe have a series:

What will happen when she crosses the perimeter? The alarm will go off.
Both her crossing and the alarm going off are presented as certainties.

What will happen if she crosses the perimeter? The alarm will go off
.
Her crossing is presented as a real possibility. The alarm going off is a certainty only in the event of her crossing.

What would happen if she crossed the perimeter? The alarm would go off.
Her crossing is presented as a less real possibility. The alarm going off is still a certainty, but only in the event of her hypothetical crossing.

If we change will/would to may/might, the certainty of the alarm going off becomes merely a possibility.


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
DavidLearn
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:37:50 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/27/2014
Posts: 2,927
Neurons: 20,885
Location: Girona, Catalonia, Spain
BHUDSON wrote:
Even though "would" is used in the second clause, it means "is certain to," so I say this is first conditional. Am I wrong? In any case, because of this complication, it might not be the best example to use.

Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:

Yours is the first conditional. The original poster's is not. But I would not say it is the second conditional either. The second conditional is about unreal situations in the present which it is not. It can have the future meaning as you presented it or the past meaning - whenever she crossed the perimeter the alarm would go off - depending on the context.


Hello BHUDSON; Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1
Thanks for your replies and comments.
This is what the police officer told the woman.
Jimmy: You're free to move anywhere within 100 foot radius. If you go past the 100 foot perimeter, an alarm activates.

Aren't both of them correct, the first and the second conditional?

David.
DavidLearn
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:40:57 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/27/2014
Posts: 2,927
Neurons: 20,885
Location: Girona, Catalonia, Spain
tunaafi wrote:
BHUDSON wrote:
Because the alarm is mechanical, the result of the condition is inevitable. There is no voluntary quality to it. Once she chooses to cross the perimeter, the alarm WILL go off. Even though "would" is used in the second clause, it means "is certain to," so I say this is first conditional. Am I wrong?


Yes.

The hypothetical part is her crossing the perimeter. The possibility of the alarm going off becomes a certainty only in the event of her actually crossing.

TWe have a series:

What will happen when she crosses the perimeter? The alarm will go off.
Both her crossing and the alarm going off are presented as certainties.

What will happen if she crosses the perimeter? The alarm will go off
.
Her crossing is presented as a real possibility. The alarm going off is a certainty only in the event of her crossing.

What would happen if she crossed the perimeter? The alarm would go off.
Her crossing is presented as a less real possibility. The alarm going off is still a certainty, but only in the event of her hypothetical crossing.

If we change will/would to may/might, the certainty of the alarm going off becomes merely a possibility.

Hi tunaafi,
Then it's fine to say that both, the first and the second conditional are correct in the questions, but of course, their meaning is different; right?

David.
tunaafi
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 10:58:48 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,869
Neurons: 50,879
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
DavidLearn wrote:


Then it's fine to say that both, the first and the second conditional are correct in the questions, but of course, their meaning is different; right?


Yes. The choice depends on the degree of certainty of the crossing in the speaker's mind.


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
DavidLearn
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 11:07:42 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/27/2014
Posts: 2,927
Neurons: 20,885
Location: Girona, Catalonia, Spain
tunaafi wrote:

Yes. The choice depende on the degree of certainty of the crossing in the speaker's mind.[/color]

Hi tunaafi,
Got it!

David.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.