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
Hi noorav,
I'm not very familiar with the terms open and remote conditional, but I think they broadly correspond to the terms second and third conditional that we use on our pages. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
To change from remote past to open past, you'll need to change the past perfect in the main clause to past simple. In the result clause, you'll need to change "would" to "will" (or another verb with open meaning, e.g. "can"). For example: If she didn't sell her shares, she will be very rich (by now). If you finished your work yesterday, you'll be able to come with us tomorrow.
To change from open past to remote past, you'll need to put the main clause verb in the past perfect, and use "would have" (or another verb with remote meaning) in the result clause. For example: If Ed had gone on holiday, you would have been able to stay in his room. (OR: ... could have stayed ...).
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Hi .
can you give an example for this structure: if+had+p.p …..should have p.p
should( just for subect i and we)
Hello hanieh1315,
I've thought about this for a few minutes, but I'm afraid nothing that makes sense comes to mind. Is there a specific context for this? Please feel free to send us what you think and we can help you with it.
All the best,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello Kirk
How about thi?
I should have bought more things if I had not forgotten to take more money with me.
Hello Rexafo,
I think 'would have' is needed here as we are talking about a result rather than any kind of advice.
You can use 'should have' in this kind of construction as a way of expressing logical deduction:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Sir, please explain the following line, I did not understand.
"Present/Past"
Here's a sentence imagining how a different situation in the present would mean that the past was different as well.
Helo Khalid Bashir,
The sentence which is given as the example is this:
It's really important. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have called you on your holiday.
It shows how the speaker can use a present tense form (being really important) to explain why something was done in the past (calling the other person). It seems a little counter-intuitive that a present situation can explain a past action, but once you realise that the present tense here does not describe an action or state now but rather something that is generally true: the situation was important yesterday, is important today and will be important tomorrow.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Teacher,
Could you please help clear up my confusion on this. Whats the difference in meaning between these two sentences :
1. The ball didn't turn as much as he thought.
2. The ball didn't turn as much as he would have thought.
Thanks in advance !
Regards,
Abhay
Hello Abhay,
The first sentence tells us that the person formed an erroneous opinion. I'm guessing the context here is cricket, so we can imagine that the person is a batsman facing a spinner. He expects a certain degree of turn and is surprised that the ball does not deviate so much. This sentence tells the story of an error by the batsman.
The second sentence introduces a hypothetical or speculative sense. We don't know if the batsman thought about it, but the speaker is speculating that if he had thought about it then he would have expected more turn. This sentence could have a more general meaning as well: it could be about the expectations of the team captain before the match (at the coin toss), when the captain is trying to assess the pitch. In that case it would have the sense of '...as much as he would have thought when he made his decision to bat first'.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thanks Peter.
You are right that cricket is the context here :)
I understood the difference but I still have some doubt on "would have" usage. I have seen this construct being used for different sentences having different meaning. For example :
1. "Had I had enough time, I would have completed the task" - So here task was not completed for sure.
2. "He would have been very nervous before his speech" - Here we are not sure if he was nervous or not ( AM I right ?). If I am right then this somewhat contradicts with above example of "would have" where we know for sure that task was not completed.
3. Indirect form of "He said, he will have done it by evening" is "He said he would have done it by evening " -> so here we are just reporting directly what a person said. Does this "would have" have different meaning ?
Thanks again!
Regards,
Abhay