Third conditionals and mixed conditionals

Conditionals are sentences with two clauses – an ‘if clause and a main clause – that are closely related. Conditional sentences are often divided into different types.

Third conditional

Third conditional sentences describe the past. They describe something that didn’t happen.

  • If I’d studied harder at school I would have gone to university.

He didn’t study very hard and he didn’t go to university.

  • We wouldn’t have got lost if you hadn’t given me the wrong directions.

She wasn't given the correct directions and she didn't find her way.

  • She might have finished the exam if she’d had more time.

She didn't finish the exam and she didn't have more time.

In third conditional sentences, the structure is usually if + past perfect and would + perfect infinitive (e.g. have done). It’s not important which clause comes first.

Notice that other modal verbs can be used instead of ‘would’ (e.g. ‘could’, ‘might’ ‘may’)

Mixed conditionals

In mixed conditional sentences the time in the ‘if’ clause is not the same as the time in the main clause. There can be various combinations.

  • If he’d gone to university he might have a better job.

He didn’t go to university (past)
He doesn’t have a very good job. (present)
This sentence shows the present consequences of a past action.

  • If I’d won the competition I’d be going to Florida next week.

She didn’t win the competition (past)
She isn’t going to Florida (future)
This sentence shows the future consequences of a past action.

  • If he didn’t have to work tomorrow he wouldn’t be so miserable today.

He has to work tomorrow (future)
He’s miserable. (present)
This sentence shows the present consequence of a future event.






''Do you know who might have visited Mr X last night''

It is used in situation where somebody really visited Mr X even though we use ''might+ present perfect'' in hyphotetical situations. Why can it be used here?

Thank you.

Hello MCWSL,

The sense here is not 'maybe someone visited Mr. X' but 'someone visited Mr. X and we do not know who it was'. In other words, the 'might' here refers to possibility in the past:

Bob might have done it, Bill might have done it, Sue might have done it and Jane might have done it. But we don't know which of them actually did it.


Best wishes,


The LearnEnglish Team

Hi The LearEnglish Team
In the second conditional sentences,could I use "were" for all subjects or just for 1st or 3rd person singular subject? I saw this sentence in a book and it made me confused " if there were no water, we would die" . Could you please explain me the usage of to be in the second conditional sentences? Thank you in advance.
Best wishes,

Hello Hien,

Yes, you can use 'were' for all persons, both singular and plural - in fact, traditionally, 'were' (a past subjunctive), was considered the only correct form here. Nowadays regular past simple forms are also used in addition to these subjunctive forms.

So 'If there were no water ...' (with the subjunctive 'were') is correct, and so is 'If there was no water ...' (with past simple 'was') is, too.

All the best,
The LearnEnglish Team

Hello. I was reading comments and this sentence is confusing to me: I had money, I could have lent you some. Cause clause is from past unreal conditional but there is no ''if'' conjunction at the beginning. Is this sentence conditional? Why can we say that?

Thank you.

Hello MCWSL,

Sometimes words or even entire phrases are omitted when we think the context is clear enough. So it's as if the sentence were 'I could have lent you some money (if I had known you needed it)' or something similar.

All the best,
The LearnEnglish Team

Hi everyone
I am a student.
Could you tell me which of them is right?
1.If i were a millionaire, i would buy everything which i want to have
2.If i was a millionaire, i would have bought everything which i want to have
Thank you very much

Hi Zhanabek525,

Both of these sentences are possible, but the meaning is different.

In the first clause both 'was' and 'were' are commonly used, and there is no difference in meaning.

In the second clause, using 'would buy' means that the sentence refers to a hypothetical/unlikely present or future action. Using 'would have bought' refers to a past action which did not take place. The meaning here is, in effect, 'I am not a millionaire, and you know this because I would have bought... and I did not.'


Best wishes,


The LearnEnglish Team

Hi there,

Suppose that I was drunken yesterday night , I don't remember I kissed a girl or not.
I this case,

If I kissed the girl, I would have to apologize to her

Is it right?

Hi bainsoo,

The problem with your sentence is that it mixes real and unreal contexts, and so it not correct. The alternatives would be as follows:

If I had kissed the girl, I would have to apologise to her.  (describing a situation in the past which I do not believe to be true, and a future consequence)

If I kissed the girl, I will have to apologise to her.  (describing a situation in the past which I do believe to be true, and a future consequence)


Best wishes,


The LearnEnglish Team