Conditionals¶

Intro¶

Condition >> Result

Conditional is a subtype of irrealis

Without modality¶

No modal:

Production is expected to increase if the condition is met. (some person, organization, forecast, or body of evidence supports the expectation)

“Expected” is often preferred in formal, technical, business, and scientific writing because it sounds more objective and can imply an external basis for the prediction:

If conditions improve, production is expected to increase by 15%.

Modal conditionals¶

Sentence	Conditional?	Probability?
If conditions improve, production will increase.	Yes	Strong prediction
If conditions improve, production should increase.	Yes	Expected result
If conditions improve, production may increase.	Yes	Possible result
If conditions improve, production could increase.	Yes	Circumstantial possibility

Framing¶

Eventive framing¶

Meaning	Formula
Conditional	If C, then E
Potential	E is possible
Eventive	If C, then E is likely/expected

Conditional + Epistemic probability framing¶

Probability, likelihood.

Conditionality
Plus epistemic probability

In English:

If C, then probably E.

Sentence	Semantics
If it rains, the match may be cancelled.	Conditional + possibility
If it rains, the match might be cancelled.	Conditional + weaker possibility / greater uncertainty
If it rains, the match could be cancelled.	Conditional + possibility enabled by circumstances
If it rains, the match will be cancelled.	Conditional + prediction
If it rains, the match should be cancelled.	Conditional + expectation / recommendation (depending on context)
If it rains, the match is cancelled.	Conditional + rule/procedure
If it rained, the match would be cancelled.	Remote conditional + predicted consequence

English has no dedicated eventive mood. Eventive meanings are typically expressed by conditional constructions combined with predictive or probabilistic modals (will, should, may, could).

When no modality is better¶

A modal auxiliary such as “will” can make a statement less categorical than an unmodalized present-tense assertion, and therefore “weaker”.

Explicit modal marking changes an assertion into a modalized prediction.

If the government prints more money, inflation rises. (presented as a general law or regular consequence)

If the government prints more money, inflation will rise. (presented as a prediction about a future outcome)

The modal will overtly marks the proposition as a prediction rather than a timeless generalization.

Rhetorically, this can sound less authoritative because the speaker signals an inference about the future instead of presenting the relationship as an established rule.

This is not because will always expresses uncertainty. In English, will often conveys a high degree of confidence.
“will” changes the type of claim: from a general law or regularity to a prediction about a future situation.

Whether this is “weaker” depends on context.

If you’re talking about a unique future event, “will” is the natural and strongest choice:

If interest rates are cut next week, the pound will probably fall.

~~If interest rates are cut next week, the pound falls.~~(this suggests a general rule rather than this specific event.)

Open vs. remote conditional¶

Is the condition a live possibility?

If yes:

May
Might
Could
Will
Should
Present tense

All fit naturally.

Usually odd without additional context:

If it rains, the match would be cancelled.

English normally prefers:

If it rains, the match will be cancelled.

If it rained, the match would be cancelled.

Open	Remote
If it rains, the match will be cancelled.	If it rained, the match would be cancelled.
If she comes, I’ll help.	If she came, I’d help.
If he asks, she’ll agree.	If he asked, she’d agree.
She may come.	She might come.
If she can come, she may attend.	If she could come, she might attend.

Ask yourself:

“In the hypothetical world where the condition is true, how confident am I that the event follows?”

High confidence / expected result → would

If I knew her number, I would call her.

Low confidence / one possibility → might

If I knew her number, I might call her.

Typical open:

Example	Meaning
If I know her number, I will call her.	future result (default)
If I know her number, I can call her.	ability/possibility
If I know her number, I should call her.	recommendation
If I know her number, I must call her.	obligation
If I know her number, I call her tomorrow.	scheduled event

Typical remote:

Example	Meaning
If I knew her number, I would call her.	hypothetical result (default counterfactual)
If I knew her number, I could call her.	hypothetical ability/possibility
If I knew her number, I might call her.	weak possibility / less committed outcome
If I knew her number, I should call her.	hypothetical recommendation / expected action
If I knew her number, I would have to call her.	hypothetical obligation

Remoteness vs. conditionality¶

Modal remoteness and conditionality are not the same thing.

If I were rich, I would travel. (conditional, remote, the travel is not presented as real)

I would help, but I’m busy. (remote, no conditional, the helping is presented as a hypothetical possibility, not an actual event)

If I had time, I would help (the conditional version)

I would never do that. (no condition is stated. yet would still carries remoteness.)

Modal conditional meaning¶

Modal	Meaning in Conditional
may	possibility
might	remote or weaker possibility
could	circumstantial possibility
will	prediction
would	remote prediction / consequence
should	expectation
Ø (present tense)	rule, schedule, procedure

Auxiliaries: Open or remote¶

Some auxiliaries are typically selected by one type of conditional, open or remote. Some can fit to both, with varying flexibility

Clear “open-only” auxiliary¶

will

If I go, I will call her (open)

~~If I went, I would call her~~ (remote, NOT will)

So will is strictly open-domain (non-remote prediction).

Clear “remote-only” counterpart¶

would

If I knew, I would call her (remote)

~~If I know, I would call her~~ (open, non-standard mismatch)

So would is the canonical remote apodosis marker.

Symmetric¶

can / could

These are the closest to a neat pair:

If I find it, I can help. (open)

If I found it, I could help. (remote)

So can ≈ open, could ≈ remote.

Note

“Could: also has non-conditional uses (ability in past, politeness, etc.), so it is not “purely remote” in meaning.

may / might

If he comes, he may win. (open)

If he came, he might win. (remote)

Again, fairly systematic pairing.

should

If I see him, I should tell him. (open, weak obligation)

If I saw him, I should tell him. (remote, hypothetical obligation)

So should is constructionally neutral.

Partial flexibility¶

must

largely open/general necessity

If you go, you must be careful. (open/general rule)

If you went, you must be careful. (odd / not standard remote reading)

Instead remote uses:

If you went, you would have to be careful.

So must does not participate well in the remote system; it gets replaced by paraphrases (would have to).

CGEL generalization¶

Instead of “open-only vs remote-only”, CGEL would prefer:

Open	Remote
will	would
can	could
may	might

Should, must are flexible but not fully symmetric

Conditional adjuncts¶

PP with conditional head:

If
Unless
Provided
As long as
On condition

I will admit I was wrong, provided you provide evidence

The student may return on condition that he improves his tone.

As long as you double down, your supporters will stay.