THE CONDITIONAL MOOD

The Conditional Mood expresses wishes and options concerning the past,
the present and the future. It has two tenses, Present Conditional and Past
Conditional. The Romanian corresponding structure is CONDIŢIONAL, with its
two tenses, PREZENT and PERFECT.
I should/would be – aş fi
I should/would have been – aş fi fost
The Conditional is formed with the auxiliaries SHOULD (for the 1 st person
singular and plural) and WOULD (for the 2 nd and 3rd persons) and a form of the
Infinitive. There is in modern English the tendency to use only WOULD for all the
persons, as an auxiliary of the Conditional, in parallel with the same tendency
within the Future Tense paradigm. The main reason for this is avoiding
homonymy, as SHOULD is a modal verb with multiple uses, many more than
WOULD, and also an auxiliary of the Subjunctive and of the Future in the Past
tenses. However, in Standard English, especially in the British variety, SHOULD
is still used as an auxiliary for the 1st-person Conditional.
It must not be forgotten that SHOULD and WOULD have many modal uses:

I am so tired that I should take a day off, if I could. (Conditional)

He shouldn’t be reading in this bad light. (Modal)
Should we buy this DVD? We can’t really afford it. (Modal)
If you should find the data, just e-mail them to me. (Modal)
He would like to be a better swimmer. (Conditional)
They would often give parties at their country house. (Modal)
She wouldn’t even look at me after I had quarrelled with her. (Modal)
I wish he would mind his own business. (Modal)
CONDITIONAL MOOD PATTERNS
Present Conditional
Affirmative
In the affirmative, the Present Conditional is formed with the auxiliaries
SHOULD and WOULD and the Present Infinitive.
Subject + SHOULD + Verb
WOULD (Present Infinitive)
I should/would stay – I’d stay
you would stay – you’d stay
 he would stay – he’d stay
we should/would stay – we’d stay
you would stay – you’d stay
they would stay – they’d stay
Negative
The negative structures are achieved by inserting the negation between the
auxiliary and the verb in the Infinitive.
Subject + SHOULD + NOT + Verb
WOULD (Present Infinitive)
I should/would not drive – I’d not drive
I shouldn’t drive
I wouldn’t drive
you would not drive – you’d not drive
you wouldn’t drive
he would not drive – he’d not drive
he wouldn’t drive
we should/would not drive – we’d not drive
we shouldn’t drive
we wouldn’t drive
you would not drive – you’d not drive
you wouldn’t drive
they would not drive – they’d not drive
they wouldn’t drive
Interrogative
The interrogative structure applies inversion between the auxiliary and the
subject:
SHOULD + Subject + Verb ?
WOULD (Present Infinitive)
should/would I spend? should/would we spend?
would you spend? would you spend?
would he spend? would they spend?
(there is no short form in the interrogative)
There are two structures of the Present Conditional Interrogative, which are
more often than not used with a modal meaning, being very rarely used as
Conditionals:
 a) SHOULD is used in the 1st person interrogative to express the speaker’s
serious doubts about doing something (in Romanian: CONJUNCTIV CU
VALOARE DE PREZUMTIV, sometimes with the adverb oare)
Should I tell them everything I know?
(Să le spun oare tot ce ştiu?)
Should we wait for a few more days before making a decision?
(Să mai aşteptăm oare câteva zile înainte de a lua o hotărâre?)
b) WOULD is used in the 2nd person as a very polite request, more polite
than could, will and can:
Would you explain this to us again, sir?
(Vreţi să ne explicaţi asta din nou, domnule?)
Would you be so kind and fill in this form?
(Sunteţi amabil să completaţi acest formular?)
Would you kindly wait here, please?
(Sunteţi atât de bun să aşteptaţi aici, vă rog?)
Interrogative-negative
The interrogative-negative form is made up by applying both Auxiliary-
Subject inversion and the insertion of the negation between the subject and the
verb. In the short form, the auxiliary is contracted with the negation:
SHOULD + Subject + NOT + Verb ?
WOULD (Present Infinitive)

SHOULD + NOT + Subject + Verb ?

WOULD (Present Infinitive)

should/would I not speak? – shouldn’t I speak?

wouldn’t I speak?
would you not speak? – wouldn’t you speak?
would he not speak? – wouldn’t he speak?
should/would I not speak? – shouldn’t we speak?
wouldn’t we speak?
would you not speak? – wouldn’t you speak?
would they not speak? – wouldn’t they speak?
Past Conditional
Affirmative
The Past Conditional, expressing desires, options about the past, is formed in
the affirmative with two auxiliaries: SHOULD/WOULD for the conditional, and
TO HAVE in the Infinitive for the perfect, the verb being in the Past Participle. To
be more exact, the Past Conditional is formed with the auxiliary for the conditional
and the Past Infinitive of the verb.
Subject + SHOULD + Aux. HAVE + Verb
WOULD (Present Infinitive) (Past Participle)
I should/would have written – I’d have written
you would have written – you’d have written
he would have written – he’d have written
we should/would have written – we’d have written
you would have written – you’d have written
they would have written – they’d have written
There is a colloquial, unrecommendable short form, which can be found
especially in illiterate speech:
I’d’ve [ai d ə v] written
Negative
The negative form is achieved by inserting the negation between the first
and the second auxiliary:
Subject + SHOULD + NOT + Aux. HAVE + Verb
WOULD (Present Infinitive) (Past Participle)
I should/would not have written – I’d not have written
I shouldn’t have written
I wouldn’t have written
you would not have written – you’d not have written
you wouldn’t have written
he would not have written – he’d not have written
he wouldn’t have written
we should/would not have written – we’d not have written
we shouldn’t have written
we wouldn’t have written
you would not have written – you’d have written
you wouldn’t have written
they would not have written – they’d not have written
they wouldn’t have written
Interrogative
The interrogative is formed by inverting the subject and the first auxiliary.
There are no short forms.
SHOULD + Subject + Aux. HAVE + Verb ?
WOULD (Present Infinitive) (Past Participle)
 should/would I have fallen? should/would we have fallen?
would you have fallen? would you have fallen?
would he have fallen? would they have fallen?
Interrogative-negative
The interrogative-negative is achieved by applying Subject-Auxiliary
inversion and also by inserting the negation between the subject and the second
auxiliary. The short form uses the contraction Auxiliary-Negation followed by the
subject and the rest of the structure.
SHOULD + Subject + NOT + Aux. HAVE + Verb ?
WOULD (Present Infinitive) (Past Participle)

SHOULD + NOT + Subject + Aux. HAVE + Verb ?

WOULD (Present Infinitive) (Past Participle)

should/would I not have lain? – shouldn’t/wouldn’t I have lain?

would you not have lain? – wouldn’t you have lain?
would he not have lain? – wouldn’t he have lain?
should/would we not have lain? – shouldn’t/wouldn’t we have lain?
would you not have lain? – wouldn’t you have lain?
would they not have lain? – wouldn’t they have lain?
The Conditional structures are mostly used in IF-Clauses and rarely in
sentences that are not involved in a conditional relation.
He wouldn’t live like that if he had a better job and a decent income.
If I had truly believed in her innocence I would have defended her.
The most frequent structure that does not involve a conditional relation at
the level of the complex sentence is that of expressing wishes and preferences.
When expressing wishes, it is not recommendable to use the verbs to want and to
wish in the conditional, because that would be a pleonastic structure. Instead, we
use the verb to like in the conditional.
* I would want to speak to him in private.
→ I would like to speak to him in private. [I want/wish to speak… ]
(Aş dori/vrea să-i vorbesc între patru ochi.)
She would like a new car but she can’t afford it.
(Ar dori/vrea // I-ar plăcea o maşină nouă, dar nu şi-o permite.)
The verb to like can be followed by both the infinitive and the gerund, but in
the conditional it can be followed only by the infinitive:
 TO LIKE TO DO I like to skate.
DOING I like skating.

SHOULD/WOULD LIKE TO DO I would like to skate now.

* DOING * I would like skating now.

IF-CLAUSES
“IF-Clauses” is the most frequent name given to a type of subordinate
clauses, Adverbial Clauses of Condition (propoziţii circumstanţiale condiţionale),
which express a conditional relationship (the circumstance under which the action
of the main clause is possible).
Connectors:
IF = dacă
UNLESS = dacă nu
IN CASE = în caz că
ON CONDITION (THAT) = cu condiţia să
PROVIDED (THAT) = cu condiţia să
PROVIDING (THAT) = cu condiţia să
SUPPOSE (THAT) = dacă, presupunând că
SUPPOSING (THAT) = dacă, cu condiţia să
SO LONG AS = câtă vreme, dacă, cu condiţia să
Sequence of tenses. There is one very important interdiction concerning IF-
Clauses, which does not allow either a future or a conditional form in an IF-Clause:
NO FUTURE OR CONDITIONAL IN AN IF-CLAUSE!
Instead of the future and the conditional we use other structures:
Type Main Clause IF-Clause

0 PRESENT TENSE PRESENT TENSE

IMPERATIVE

1 FUTURE TENSE PRESENT TENSE

2 PRESENT CONDITIONAL PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE

(~ Past Tense)
 3 PAST CONDITIONAL PAST SUBJUNCTIVE

(= Past Perfect)

Type 0
Water boils if we heat it at 100°C.
(Apa fierbe dacă o încălzim la 100°C.)
Send us the information if you find it.
(Trimite-ne informaţiile dacă le găseşti.)
Type 1
You won’t succeed if you don’t try.
(Nu vei reuşi dacă nu vei încerca.)
Type 2
I would persuade him if I had more time at my disposal.
(L-aş convinge dacă aş avea mai mult timp la dispoziţie.)
Type 3
She would have bought the bag if she hadn’t lost her credit card.
(Ar fi cumpărat geanta dacă nu şi-ar fi pierdut cartea de credit./ Cumpăra
geanta, dacă nu-şi pierdea cartea de credit.)
▶ The second Romanian translation is more colloquial than the first,
using IMPERFECT CU VALOARE DE CONDIŢIONAL PERFECT.
Besides these four structures, there is also the possibility of a combination
between types 2 and 3, showing that something in the past is the circumstance that
determined a present course of action:
If he hadn’t shouted so much at the match he wouldn’t be so hoarse now.
(Dacă n-ar fi urlat atât de mult la meci, acum n-ar fi atât de răguşit.)
There are some special structures that need discussing.
1. Not always a subordinate clause connected by if is an IF-Clause. When if
is replaceable by whether (=dacă da sau nu), connecting a Direct or an Indirect
Object Clause, Sequence of Tenses does not apply:
I don’t know if he will come. [IF = WHETHER]
(= I don’t know the fact of his coming → no sequence of tenses)
I’ll know if he comes.
(= I’ll know on a certain condition → sequence of tenses applies)
2. In IF-Causes type 2 the verb is in the Present Subjunctive, which has
almost the same form as the Past Tense Simple. The difference lies in the form of
the verb to be in the 1st and 3rd person singular:
 I were (să fiu/aş fi) we were
you were you were
he were they were
There is a strong tendency in modern English to eliminate the difference
between the Subjunctive and the Past Tense Simple, so that there are parallel forms
for the 1st and 3rd persons singular, was/were. Were is still the form preferred in
Standard English, especially British English.
If I were you…(= dacă aş fi în locul tău) has even become a formula in
speech. The structure can be obviously used in the other persons as well.
If I were you, I wouldn’t take such a black view of things.
If she were him, she would probably hit the roof.
3. If is only one of the conditional connectors.
I won’t help you unless I see some improvement in your attitude.
Take some sandwiches with you, just in case you are delayed.
They would agree to the terms only on condition they derived some
further profit from the contract.
Provided they bring the supplies we ordered on time, we’ll make it
worth their while.
You can get a licence providing you bring some other proof of
identity than this certificate.
Suppose that you had Alzheimer, what would you do?
Supposing he had paid his debt on time, would they still have
forbidden him access to the house?
You can bring your friends here so long as you don’t make too much
noise.
Two of these connectors need special discussion.
a) UNLESS is a negation and cannot be used with any other negation (not,
no, nobody, no-one, none, neither, neither… nor, nothing, never, nowhere, the
adverbs hardly/barely/scarcely/seldom/rarely/only, the pronouns and adjectives
little/few, the verb to fail, the preposition without, etc.)
* Unless nobody turns up, we’ll have to postpone the meeting.
(If nobody turns up…/Unless somebody turns up…)
b) IN CASE raises a problem of translation. It is never followed by THAT,
but the Romanian speaker tends to translate the Romanian structure în caz că
literally and this is the source of a frequent mistake:
În caz că eşti ocupat, n-o să te deranjez.
* In case that you are busy I won’t bother you.
In case you are busy I won’t bother you.
 4. The conjunction if can be deleted in certain structures, with the
subsequent repositioning of the subject and predicate:
 IF-Clause type 3
If they had had any premonition of the disaster, maybe something
could have been saved.
→ Had they had any premonition of the disaster, maybe something could
have been saved.
“Had we never loved so kindly,
Had we never loved so blindly,
Never met or never parted,
We had never been broke-hearted.”
(Robert Burns)
 IF-Clause type 2 if the verb is to be
If she were aware of the situation she would try to put it right.
→ Were she aware of the situation she would try to put it right.
 IF-Clause types 0 or 1 with the modal should, expressing high
improbability
If you should find the files give them to the police.
→ Should you find the files give them to the police.
5. Normally should and would cannot be used in IF-Clauses, the exceptions
being the two cases when they are modal verbs:
a) SHOULD can be used in an IF-Clause type 0 or 1 in order to express
high improbability (the speaker does not really think that the action of the IF-
Clause is going to happen but raises the possibility of the action). A frequent text
on commercial products is:
If you should have any complaints about this product, please contact us…
Should you have any complaints about this product, please contact us…
(Dacă se întâmplă să aveţi / Dacă aveţi cumva / Dacă se întâmplă cumva să
aveţi nemulţumiri în legătură cu acest produs, vă rugăm să ne contactaţi …)
b) WOULD can be used in IF-Clauses type 2 as a polite request or to
express volition:
If you would help me this once I would be deeply grateful to you.
(Dacă ai vrea să mă ajuţi / Dacă eşti bun//amabil//drăguţ să mă ajuţi / Dacă
ai avea amabilitatea//bunăvoinţa să mă ajuţi de data asta, ţi-aş fi foarte îndatorat.)
If he would only ask we could explain everything to him.
(Dacă ar vrea numai să întrebe, i-am putea explica totul.)
 6. A negative IF-Clause type 2 or 3 with the structure IF + IT + NOT + TO
BE + FOR smth/smb can be turned into an Adverbial of Condition (complement
circumstanţial condiţional) with BUT FOR (= în lipsa, în absenţa, fără)
If it were’t for Jack, I wouldn’t have the job.
→ But for Jack, I wouldn’t have the job.
If it hadn’t been for her insistence, we wouldn’t be here today.
→ But for her insistence, we wouldn’t be here today.
7. Another case of contraction, which has the value of a formula, is
WEATHER PERMITTING (= If the weather permits)
Weather permitting, the tournament will begin on schedule.