if I come or if I came

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

cyber - 27 Feb 2004 23:12 GMT

I just had a talk with UPS customer service. I told them "If I come
to pick it (the package) up, where should I go to?" Now I'm off the
phone, I'm thinking, should I have said "If I came to pick it up ..."
The idea is from the structure "If I were you, ..."

Reply to this Message

Adrian Bailey - 28 Feb 2004 01:31 GMT

> I just had a talk with UPS customer service. I told them "If I come
> to pick it (the package) up, where should I go to?" Now I'm off the
> phone, I'm thinking, should I have said "If I came to pick it up ..."
> The idea is from the structure "If I were you, ..."

"If I came" sounds like you're not going to do it. I assume "If I come" was
more appropriate in this case.

The (minor) mistake you made was to add a superfluous "to" at the end.

Adrian

Reply to this Message

Sebastian Hew - 28 Feb 2004 12:33 GMT

'If I were you...' is a counterfactual (hypothetical) subjunctive,
implying that I am not you. It's use would not be appropriate if you did
intend to pick it up.

Reply to this Message

Michael Nitabach - 28 Feb 2004 19:01 GMT

>> I just had a talk with UPS customer service. I told them "If I
>> come to pick it (the package) up, where should I go to?" Now I'm
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> implying that I am not you. It's use would not be appropriate if
> you did intend to pick it up.

I don't think the counterfactual subjunctive implies its converse
purely as a matter of grammatical structure. For example, 'If I were
to go to the store, I would wear a shirt and shoes' does not imply
that you will not go to the store. It just describes what additional
conditions will obtain if the counterfactual does come to pass.

Under this view, "If I were you..." does not, purely as a matter of
syntax, imply that I am not you. It is the semantic reality that I
cannot be you that leads to that implication. Similarly, "If I were to
come to pick up the package, where should I go?" does not imply that
you will not pick up the package.

Does this make sense?

Signature

Mike Nitabach

Reply to this Message

Rolleston - 28 Feb 2004 19:48 GMT

>I don't think the counterfactual subjunctive implies its converse
>purely as a matter of grammatical structure. For example, 'If I were
>to go to the store, I would wear a shirt and shoes' does not imply
>that you will not go to the store. It just describes what additional
>conditions will obtain if the counterfactual does come to pass.

Is there a counterfactual there?
For counterfactuals, how about these:

"were I there now, ..."

or

"had I done that, ..."

?

Perhaps I don't follow your argument.

R.

Reply to this Message

Michael Nitabach - 28 Feb 2004 21:05 GMT

>>I don't think the counterfactual subjunctive implies its converse
>>purely as a matter of grammatical structure. For example, 'If I were
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Perhaps I don't follow your argument.

You've wrested my argument from its context, which is a discussion of
the difference in meaning between "If I come to pick it up..." and "If
I came to pick it up..."

I'm no grammar expert, so maybe what we're talking about is not the
counterfactual subjunctive, but rather the regular subjunctive (if
there is a difference).

Signature

Mike Nitabach

Reply to this Message

Rolleston - 28 Feb 2004 21:22 GMT

>>>I don't think the counterfactual subjunctive implies its converse
>>>purely as a matter of grammatical structure. For example, 'If I were
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>the difference in meaning between "If I come to pick it up..." and "If
>I came to pick it up..."

Indeed. The context may not be terribly important in this case.
But if we look to the context we see your example differs
significantly from the one you quote ("if I were you...").
That quoted example looks more like a counterfactual to me.

>I'm no grammar expert, so maybe what we're talking about is not the
>counterfactual subjunctive, but rather the regular subjunctive (if
>there is a difference)

I'm no expert either. Let's see if someone who is
has something to say on the subject.

Thanks,

R.

Reply to this Message

Carmen L. Abruzzi - 28 Feb 2004 21:15 GMT

Once upon a 2/28/04 11:01 AM, in the land of
Xns949D8EACEA25Emnitabachacedslcom@216.196.97.140, the good witch "Michael
Nitabach" from <mnitabach@acedsl.com> told the whole world all about how:

>>> I just had a talk with UPS customer service. I told them "If I
>>> come to pick it (the package) up, where should I go to?" Now I'm
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> Does this make sense?

It does. The common description of the subjunctive as "counterfactual" is
unfortunate. The subjunctive can be used in counterfactual utterances, but
it does not of itself define an utterance as counterfactual. In fact
"hypothetical" might be a better description of the use of the subjunctive
than "counterfactual". Outright lies are "counterfactual" but they are not
couched in the subjunctive; that would give them away. "I paid what I owe"
as a lie wouldn't work if it were phrased "Had I paid what I owe".

But neither are all "if" statements necessarily subjunctive. The indicative
"If I pay what I owe, there will be a record of it" is perfectly valid. The
subjunctive version "If I paid what I owe, there would be a record of it"
is also valid. Note that the past tense of the indicative has the same form
as the subjunctive present, "If I paid what I owe, there would be a record
of it" (the difference is in the tense of the following phrase).

The original question could've used either the indicative "If I come, where
should I go" or the subjunctive "if I came, where would I go", it doesn't
make any real difference. The subjunctive perhaps implies a bit more
hypotheticallity but there isn't much practical difference.

Signature

Carmen L. Abruzzi

Reply to this Message

Michael West - 28 Feb 2004 21:52 GMT

> I don't think the counterfactual subjunctive implies its converse
> purely as a matter of grammatical structure. For example, 'If I were
> to go to the store, I would wear a shirt and shoes' does not imply
> that you will not go to the store. It just describes what additional
> conditions will obtain if the counterfactual does come to pass.

I disagree. It does imply that you are not
going to the store now or in the forseeable
future. Otherwise, why would you cast the
sentence in hypothetical form?

If you said, "If I were to go to the store, etc", and
then it became obvious that you were indeed planning
on going, I would suspect you of playing at some sort
of game or deception.

Signature

Michael West

Reply to this Message

Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2004

if I come or if I came