MGMAT SC page 113, if -then constructions

[pranabiitkgp]

1. If Sophie EATS pizza tomorrow, then she WILL BECOME ill.
2. If Sophie ATE pizza tomorrow, then she would become ill

My questions are:

a. How is 1 in present? even though EATS (present tense) is used, we're talking about tomorrow.

b. Why 'ate' , the past form of eat is used to tell some action on future , here tomorrow ?
Thanks.

[jnelson0612]

1. If Sophie EATS pizza tomorrow, then she WILL BECOME ill.
2. If Sophie ATE pizza tomorrow, then she would become ill

My questions are:

a. How is 1 in present? even though EATS (present tense) is used, we're talking about tomorrow.

b. Why 'ate' , the past form of eat is used to tell some action on future , here tomorrow ?
Thanks.

a. These are good questions. The first clause is in the present because when she is actually eating the pizza she is doing it in the present, and as a result of eating the pizza something will happen in the future. Thus the sentence uses the "IF present, THEN future" construction.

An example is "If I play (PRESENT) racquetball tomorrow, then I will be (FUTURE) sore the next day."

b. This is tricky. This has more to do with what will happen after she eats the pizza and the author's belief that she will not in fact do so. The author thinks that it is unlikely that she will eat the pizza. However, he is focusing more on what would happen if she did eat the pizza, in the unlikely event that she would do so. Thus, if she did indeed eat the pizza (thus it's already happened--past tense) something will happen to her (conditional).

[pranabiitkgp]

Hi Jamie, thanks for answering, however i am neither convinced nor could find any logical scientific explanation in your answers rather both the answers failed to referred any rules and rather depending mostly on the matter of perception of the writer .

a)"when she is actually eating the pizza she is doing it in the present" - by this logic there would have no requirement of any specific tense ever . Any thing which is meant to do anytime would be actually be performed by anyone staying on that time only .
Probably to mention some certain/fixed action in future (present tense is used) and its equally certain consequences the 'will' is used .

b) Completely confused .

Past(1)----------Present(2)----------future(3)

Now we are standing at 2) , saying if some actions did occur at 1) , what would happen at 3) .
If this is the case then how tomorrow is used for 'some actions did occur at 1)'

[jnelson0612]

Hi prana,
I'm sorry to hear that my explanation wasn't helpful to you. I've read through your comment and my explanation a few times, and unfortunately I don't know if I can explain it much better than I have for the two examples. I think the thing to focus on here is that these particular constructions are in fact allowed and considered acceptable on the GMAT, even though they may not appear to make much sense.

I'm really sorry I couldn't be more helpful to you.

[tim]

Hi Prana,
Let me take a stab at this one. The best way to look at the tenses in these sentences is to consider the perspective of the speaker. In hypothetical sentences such as these, we often step outside the perspective of the present. For your first example, your perspective is tomorrow, at which point the "eats" will be considered present tense and "will become" will be in the future from that point of view. In the second example, our perspective is some point further in the future, at which point "ate" and "would become" will both fall in the past from that point of view. i hope this helps. The best thing to keep in mind though is what Jamie mentioned, namely that you should just keep these unusual constructions in mind and remember these examples when you need to match a new sentence to one of these forms..

[pranabiitkgp]

Hi tim ,
Thanks for your explanation, bringing perspective into the 'time scale' makes things somewhat clear . Also the best suggestions noted !

- Pranab.

[jnelson0612]

Good to hear prana!

Thank you Tim.

[pranabiitkgp]

Hi Jamie & Tim - You both have wrongly spelled my name, it should be Pranab, not Prana ! There should not have any confusion among similar words :-)
- Pranab.

[jnelson0612]

Sorry pranab. At some point we have to shorten the usernames to save our own sanity; will try to do better next time. :-)

[rte.sushil]

1. If Sophie ATE pizza tomorrow, then she would become ill

Would there be any effect if i remove tomorrow?I think NO, still just confirming.

a.) if i were a PM tomorrow, then i would do this... (if i become PM tomorrow)
b.) If i were a PM, then i would do this .. (if i become PM)
Both are grammatically correct?


2.)
The editor of our local newspaper, who has earned much acclaim in her long career, was awarded a Pulitzer Prize yesterday.

When i understand the meaning of above sentence , i think has earned is correctly used. But when i see the tenses i got some questions
a.) has earned--> effect should be there till present, and prize was awarded yesterday so isn't it..
The editor of our local newspaper, who had earned much acclaim in her long career, was awarded a Pulitzer Prize yesterday.
(everything is in past here.)
or
The editor of our local newspaper, who has earned much acclaim in her long career, is awarded a Pulitzer Prize.
(everything is in present here.)
b.) Can you give me some more different examples where has/ was are used in same sentence or some examples where my doubt can be more clarified.

[tim]

1 - both are grammatically correct, although 1a doesn't make much sense

2a - who are you to say that the editor cannot continue to earn acclaim after receiving a Pulitzer prize?

2b - you can search the text of the OG just as easily as we can; why don't you provide the examples (and actually tell us what your "doubt" is), and we'll be glad to help you understand them



@pranab: if you want someone to infer the correct spelling of your name, perhaps you should tell them what it is rather than giving them a string of characters and then getting upset when they truncate it somewhere other than where you wanted them to.

[rte.sushil]

1 - both are grammatically correct, although 1a doesn't make much sense

2a - who are you to say that the editor cannot continue to earn acclaim after receiving a Pulitzer prize?

2b - you can search the text of the OG just as easily as we can; why don't you provide the examples (and actually tell us what your "doubt" is), and we'll be glad to help you understand them

Actually i had the doubt that sentences should be in the same tenses. so i asked that we can replace has with had in the following sentence:-
The editor of our local newspaper, who has earned much acclaim in her long career, was awarded a Pulitzer Prize yesterday.

but what you said is also correct. I will keep this in point.

Thanks!

[tim]

cool. let us know if there are any further questions..