Look at these examples to see how third and mixed conditionals are used.
We would have walked to the top of the mountain if the weather hadn't been so bad.
If we'd moved to Scotland when I was a child, I would have a Scottish accent now.
If she was really my friend, she wouldn't have lied to me.
Try this exercise to test your grammar.
- Grammar test 1
Read the explanation to learn more.
Grammar explanation
Do you know how to use third and mixed conditionals?
Third conditionals and mixed conditionals
Conditionals describe the result of a certain condition. The if clause tells you the condition (If I hadn't been ill) and the main clause tells you the result (I would have gone to the party). The order of the clauses does not change the meaning.
If I hadn't been ill, I would have gone to the party.
I would have gone to the party if I hadn't been ill.
Conditional sentences are often divided into different types.
Third conditional
The third conditional is used to imagine a different past. We imagine a change in a past situation and the different result of that change.
If I had understood the instructions properly, I would have passed the exam.
We wouldn't have got lost if my phone hadn't run out of battery.
In third conditional sentences, the structure is usually: If + past perfect >> would have + past participle.
Mixed conditionals
We can use mixed conditionals when we imagine a past change with a result in the present or a present change with a result in the past.
1. Past/Present
Here's a sentence imagining how a change in a past situation would have a result in the present.
If I hadn't got the job in Tokyo, I wouldn't be with my current partner.
So the structure is: If + past perfect >> would + infinitive.
2. Present/Past
Here's a sentence imagining how a different situation in the present would mean that the past was different as well.
It's really important. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have called you on your holiday.
And the structure is: If + past simple >> would have + past participle.
Do this exercise to test your grammar again.
- Grammar test 2
Hello.
"If you could change one thing about this week what would it be?" I saw this sentence and I have a question why do we use conditional 2, if we are talking about past?
After that I tried to answer this question and I'd stuck. How should I answer it and should I use mixed conditionals? Are those below correct?
"I've got a 3 for my test. If I had a majic wand and could wave it this week, i would not overreact to the bad news. I would take it easy." If it's correct, why don't we use conditional 3 here talking about past?
"This week was exhausting, however if I changed something, I should/would have found time to go out with my classmates more to change the scenery" Here I tried to use mixed conditional, is it okay?
Which way is better and why?
Hello artika_11,
In your first example you are talking about a change which you make now, not a change you made previously. Since it's not real, you can think of it like a magic spell. It changes the past, but you make the change now, not in the past.
Your second example is similar. You are talking about having a magic wand now. The wand has the ability to change the past, but the change (waving the wand) happens in the present.
I think the sentence needs a few changes:
The conditional structure is still if + past > would for the reasons explained above.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear sir,
I am an English learner. Recently, I come across this questions.
What is the difference between these two sentences? Are they both grammatically correct? Thanks for your help.
Hello Ribena,
Both sentences are grammatically possible.
The if-clause in each sentence describes an imaginary present or general time situation. The speaker is not rich and is imagining being rich.
The result clause in the first sentence (I would travel) describes a present or future result. The result clause in the second sentence (I would have travelled) describes a past result - something the speaker would have done in their past.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
I'm studying english because it is a thing that I don't like but I feel that I need improve my english and I have a lot of free time in my working. I hope all persons that are reading this that improve the english with me!!!
Good luck and sorry for the bad structures in my writting! I'm learning! :)
:) :) :) :) :) :)
Greetings,
A: Have you ever heard of Alex Zalevich?
B: Yes, he was a fashion designer many years ago. His collections were bizarre, eccentric, and funny at the same time.
A: That's right; his imagination was good, but, he would never have worn any of his masterpieces...at least in public.
Is it okay to use 'would never have worn' to make a tentative suggestion of this probability or tendency in the past?
What is the difference between 'would never have worn' and 'would never wear' in this case?
Thank you
Hello Tony_M,
Yes, that is perfectly fine.
The form would + verb here refers to typical behaviour for the person, while would have + verb3 most often refers to expected behaviour in a particular situation or set of situations.
However, when the context makes it clear that we are talking about a finished time context (i.e. the person is no longer alive) or that we are talking about general behaviour (through the use of the word 'never'), these distinctions are academic. Lexical additions and contexts can limit or change the meaning of verb forms. For example, we can say 'He went to the cafe' to mean a single action or 'He always went to the cafe' to mean a habit.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank you very much, Peter.
Would the same idea work in a conditional sentence?
A: Why are you late?
B: The traffic in the city center is very heavy. Some streets are blocked because of a protest march.
A: I see, they are very common now.
B: Yes, many things have changed in the last few years. If people organized such marches 20 years ago, they would've been beaten by the police in the majority of cases.
Is there any difference between:
- they would've been beaten by the police in the majority of cases;
- they would be beaten by the police in the majority of cases.
Hello again Tony_M,
I think here you are a little off with the verb in the if-clause. Since you are talking about an unreal/imaginary act in the past you need the past perfect: If they had organised.... rather than If they organised...
Following this if-clause would have been beaten describes a past result while would be beaten describes a present result. You can perhaps imagine some context in which a present beating is caused by searching in past records but I think it's fairly clear from this example that the beating was in the past, so would have been beaten is the correct form here.
The earlier sentence used would and would have to describe expected or representative behaviour. Here you have a condition-result relationship.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team