Grammar help. | Mumsnet

heldinadream · 05/04/2024 20:36

Yes. But if you're speaking rather than writing, you'd say - I'd really love it if you'd play with me.

thistimelastweek · 05/04/2024 20:37

I was taught that would and could go together. As in , ' I would really love it if you could play with me'.

Similarly should and would go together. 'I should really love it if you would play with me'.

There is a shade of difference in meaning between the two.

Original poster

Awaywiththeferries123 · 05/04/2024 20:41

It’s a line from a song in the kids television show.

I don’t have an issue with it but I’m not as good with languages and grammar as my husband. He loses his mind over it, says you can’t use ‘would’ in a conditional clause but none of the examples he gives me quite match the one I’ve given.

OP posts:

ASighMadeOfStone · 07/04/2024 15:39

Technically, it's a second conditional sentence, which is formed by:
If + past simple in one clause, and would+ infinitive in the other. (the clauses can be either way round)
So:
"I'd really love it if you played with me"
"If you played with me, I'd really love it"
would be the "standard" structure.
However, these sentences can be varied, and still correct, by using modals or structures such as "if you were to play with me" instead of the past simple. And of course, "would" is also (technically) the past of "will", like "could is the past of "can"

So, TL:DR- yes, the sentence is correct.

I imagine the people who think it isn't, over apply the basic rule and the fact that the two "woulds" in your example serve two different grammar purposes doesn't occur to them.

Pocketfullofdogtreats · 07/04/2024 15:51

ASighMadeOfStone · 07/04/2024 15:39

Technically, it's a second conditional sentence, which is formed by:
If + past simple in one clause, and would+ infinitive in the other. (the clauses can be either way round)
So:
"I'd really love it if you played with me"
"If you played with me, I'd really love it"
would be the "standard" structure.
However, these sentences can be varied, and still correct, by using modals or structures such as "if you were to play with me" instead of the past simple. And of course, "would" is also (technically) the past of "will", like "could is the past of "can"

So, TL:DR- yes, the sentence is correct.

I imagine the people who think it isn't, over apply the basic rule and the fact that the two "woulds" in your example serve two different grammar purposes doesn't occur to them.

I understand how 'would' can be past tense (I would have gone, if I'd known about it) but I don't understand how it's past tense in the OP's example. It seems to be future. Could you explain it, please?

ASighMadeOfStone · 07/04/2024 16:39

Pocketfullofdogtreats · 07/04/2024 15:51

I understand how 'would' can be past tense (I would have gone, if I'd known about it) but I don't understand how it's past tense in the OP's example. It seems to be future. Could you explain it, please?

Show quote history

It's the past form used to refer to future time. (It's because we don't have a subjunctive, otherwise, as it's hypothetical future time, we'd use that)