作者l10nel (小失)
看板Eng-Class
標題[文法]What would..when [past-tense]的兩個語境
時間Thu Apr 18 04:46:50 2013
再次得到 Pullum 教授（
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_K._Pullum）撥冗賜
教，以下全文實錄：
[去信]
Dear Professor Pullum:
I am wondering if you could help with another grammar question. I am trying
to determine whether this question:
What would you do when you were bitten by a snake?
can have two interpretations instead of just one, given proper contexts.
Below, I try to construct a scenario to include both interpretations:
[In a village where snake bites are not uncommon. Paul, a snake expert who
has been bitten many times in the past 20 years, gives a talk to local
residents who have come to learn about snake bites. Paul does not know
whether anyone in the audience has ever been bitten by a snake in their life
and does not assume anyone has. But he starts his talk like this:]
(1) "Hi, everyone. Let me ask you this: What would do when you were bitten
by a snake?"
[Someone from the audience raises her hand] "It has never happened to me.
If I were bitten by a snake, I guess I would ..."
[laughter and chatter]
Paul: "In fact, I have been bitten by snakes many times in my 20-year career
dealing with snakes. That's why I am here giving this talk."
(2) [Another from the audience asked: "So Paul,"] what would you do when you
were bitten by a snake?"
Paul: "That is exactly the topic of this talk. When I was bitten by a snake,
I {would follow, followed} these 5-step approach..."
My analysis:
(1) is the less obvious, future interpretation. "When" is basically the same
as the conditional (hypothetical) "if", and does not assume factuality. The
addressee may or may not be bitten by snakes in the future. The question is
a "tentative" (remote/polite/etc.) conditional. Many prefer "if" over "when"
(including me), but I believe "when" is still grammatical and standard
English. In fact, I observe authentic parallel sentences using "when", in
published non-fiction and non-linguistic books. Prescriptivists, ESL
teachers and beginner grammar books will waste no time dismissing this
conditional "when" outright as ungrammatical. So far, I found this
conditional (contingency) usage of "when" described at length in one grammar
book ("Conditionals" by Declerck) and briefly in Quirk et al. I am still
trying to locate mention of it in your Cambridge Grammar of the English
Language.
(2) is the salient, past-experience interpretation. "When" cannot be
replaced with "if". "When" is temporal and assumes past occurrences. This
is the canonical, factual/temporal sense of "when". Many people see only
this interpretation.
Thank you very much for reading this far. I appreciate your comments.
Sincerely,
-----
[回覆]
I think you've got it exactly right. I would add only this: in [1] the
"would" is the preterite of WILL used in its modal remoteness sense to
explore a hypothetical or counterfactual possible event. In [2], the "would"
is the preterite used in its past-time-reference sense, so "what would you
do" is roughly equivalent to "what was it that you used to do". The "when"
clause is therefore a counterfactual conditional in [1] but not in [2].
GKP
以上，如對所用任何字詞（如 hypothetical, counterfactual, remote 等）有疑問，歡
迎討論，我會試著用中文釋義。有時候，討論可能因為拘泥於一個字的定義（不同人從不
同資料、領域，可能得到不同定義，這很正常）而造成誤會、失焦。但在這裡，這些字詞
在完整的敘述句中，和清晰的邏輯脈絡下，意思就很明顯、明確。即使你對某一字詞有堅
定不移的定義，全篇內容的主要意旨仍不受影響。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 76.198.133.1
推 zofloya:thanks again 04/18 09:21
推 tengharold:push 04/18 09:30
推 linzh:前面Declerk回信說"when cannot introduce a conditional 04/18 16:16
→ linzh:clause" 不過你說你看到他的書中(Conditionals)有提到when 04/18 16:16
→ linzh:的conditional usage 如果方便的話 可以引用一小段嗎? 04/18 16:17
→ linzh:或是你可以告知頁數? 謝謝 04/18 16:17
→ l10nel:我原本有摘錄分享的打算，但你也知道，因故推遲。我會po的, 04/18 18:55
→ l10nel:除非有人搶先一步。你可先參考31-35頁滿滿4頁細分when的 04/18 18:55
→ l10nel:conditional涵義。 04/18 18:58
推 linzh:thanks 我會去看看的 04/18 19:14