CONDITIONALS: IF + simple present, ...+ simple present

[Lobo]

I listened and read the story about conditionals and I know the four types of conditional given as examples:

IF + simple present, ...+ simple present
IF + simple present,... + future (will)
IF + simple past,..+ simple conditional (would/could)
IF + past perfect ...+ conditional perfect (would have)

But in the lesson, I found another conditional:

IF + simple past,..+ simple past:

“If you were 18, you had to do something called national service”.
“If you thought along those lines, you were called a "conscientious objector" and you had to appear before a special tribunal and explain your reasons”.

Is this another classification of conditional or it is not?

I understand the idea of these two sentences, because the person who is telling the story is explaining what happened in the past.

But following this line, I think that the sentence: “If the telephone rang, I would jump in the air” should be also expressed in past tense: “If the telephone rang, I jumped in the air” because it is also something that happened, not something that would happen.

Why then is it used, in this sentence, the past and the conditional?

I have another question: what about the sentence “If you drink, don't drive”? Is it another type of conditional (IF + simple present , …+ imperative) or it is not?

Regards.

[Mordant]

There are all sorts of possibilities with conditionals.

If you are buying lunch, I will pay for the drinks later.

That doesn't fit the categories you listed at the top, but it's common and acceptable.

The "would" in the telephone sentence has the same meaning as "used to." It refers to habitual action in the past.

[Alan]

Hi Lobo,

Glad you read my piece on conditionals. the examples you quoted work because there are many variations of this type of construction. A perfect example of this variety can be found in your sentences:

If the telephone rang, I would jump in the air. This can suggests that in the event of the telephone ringing, the result could be me jumping in the air. Then again 'would' can be used to suggest in a literary form something that happened frequently in the past and suggests that when the telephone rang, I always jumped in the air.

Again this sentence: If the telephone rang, I jumped in the air describes in a non-literary from what happened each time I heard the telephone.

The difficulty with English is that unlike other European languages it doesn't distinguish between the real past and the unreal past except in constructions like 'If I were you...'

Alan
_________________
English as a Second Language
You can read my ESL story Present Simple

[Lobo]

Hi Alan and Mordant,

I want to thank you both for the expalanation you gave me, which was very clear.

Now I know that I was not quite wrong, because there is another use or meaning for the word "would" when it is used in literary form: something that happened frequently in the past or simply "used to".

I appreciate very much your help. Your language is very interesting to me who speaks Spanish.

Please let me know if "thank you both" is correct or I should have said both of you. Or how can I say it correctly?

Regrads.

[Mordant]

Either "thank you both" or "thank both of you" is fine.

You're welcome. :-)