Conditional tense: θα + ?

martinlest

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 16
    • Gender:Male
Hi. I came across this text...

"θα κέρδισα 5000 Εύρο, θα πήγα στην Ρουμανία να δω την οικογένεια μου. θα τις έφερα πολλά  δωράκια, και από κι, θα πήγαινα στην Γερμανία..."

Can I ask, what exactly is 'θα κέρδισα'? Why not θα κέρδιζα'? Αlso 'θα πήγα'; 'θa έφερα', where 'θα' is used with the aorist past form rather than the imperfect? I automatically use the form 'θα πήγαινα' for the present conditional (I would go). Is the meaning very close, or quite different? Both forms are used above (underlined) and I am not sure how to appreciate the difference in meaning, if there be one.

Had this doubt for many years, so about time I cleared it up!

Whilst I am posting... I know (I think!) the following (underlined) can also be used for present and past conditional:

Θα έγραφα = θα έχω γραμμένος (I would write)
Θα είχα γράψει = Θα είχα γραμμένος (I would have written)

Do the pairs convey exactly the same meaning, or is there a difference? Again, I would habitually use the first option. maybe the second is less common now (?). Seem to recall it is used with sentences using κιόλας/πιά (??)

Many thanks.
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 04:39:26 by martinlest »


spiros

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 814140
    • Gender:Male
  • point d’amour
Wrong: θα κέρδισα 5000 Εύρο, θα πήγα στην Ρουμανία να δω την οικογένεια μου. θα τις έφερα πολλά  δωράκια
Correct: θα κέρδιζα 5000 Εύρο, θα πήγαινα στην Ρουμανία να δω την οικογένεια μου. Θα τους έφερνα πολλά  δωράκια.
If you want to maintain the "σ", you would say "θα είχα κερδίσει" -> "I would have earned".

This makes no sense with an "ς" (it means "I would have him written"):
θα έχω γραμμένος
Θα είχα γραμμένος

"Τον έχω γραμμένο" means "I don't give a toss about him". Or "Θα τον είχα γραμμένο" -> "I would not have given a toss about him"

πιά needs no accent
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%80%CE%B9%CE%B1

Grammar: [Advanced] Mixed Conditionals (Μικτοί Υποθετικοί Λόγοι)
http://lexialds.blogspot.com/2013/10/grammar-advanced-mixed-conditionals.html

Στη συνέχεια μπορούμε να εστιάσουμε στην τροπική διάβαθμιση της πιθανότητας/βεβαιότητας όπως αποτυπώνεται στους τρεις τυπικούς υποθετικούς λόγους. Στόχος η αναγνώριση της κλιμάκωσης στο συνεχές αυτής της τροπικότητας. Π.χ
«Αν διαβάσω θα γράψω στις εξετάσεις.»
«Αν διάβαζα, θα έγραφα στις εξετάσεις.»
«Αν είχα διαβάσει, θα είχα γράψει στις εξετάσεις.»
http://garbounisblog.blogspot.com/2018/10/blog-post_56.html
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 09:09:11 by spiros »



martinlest

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 16
    • Gender:Male
That which you say is correct is certainly what I would have written, and I understand all your examples just fine, thank you.

So in the end, 'θα πήγα στην Ρουμανία' is just incorrect Greek then. I was confused when I read it, but assumed that as it came from a Greek source, it must be right somehow. When I Googled "θα πήγα", I got some 2000 results, which added to my confusion as to the meaning and/or correctness. Looking again, I think they are Ancient Greek, though I haven't checked that properly. Does 'θα πήγα' exist in Ancient Greek? I only have a very vague knowledge of it.

I have looked out my Greek grammar book since posting. Definitely written there that this is correct Greek (a second form of the conditional, it says):

Θα είχα γραμμένος πιά (I would have already written)

(with the accent on πιά, though I wouldn't put it, I agree). The book includes a lot of rather old Greek too - so I guess this form must be archaic. As I say, it wouldn't have occurred to me to write the Greek in that way, I would write 'Θα είχα γράψει κιόλας'

Many thanks.
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 13:56:37 by martinlest »


spiros

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 814140
    • Gender:Male
  • point d’amour
Θα είχα γραμμένος πιά - makes no sense. You need double negative in Greek, like δεν θα είχα γραμμένο πια/πλέον.

θα πήγα actually has 118 results https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%CE%B8%CE%B1+%CF%80%CE%AE%CE%B3%CE%B1%22&sxsrf=ALeKk01dLhI3r3rDSShftD0zAHxapl7wvQ:1591096090312&ei=GjPWXpLMEtCWsAfurIPABA&start=120&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwiSwZDq_uLpAhVQC-wKHW7WAEg4WhDy0wN6BAgLED0&biw=1099&bih=584

And some results are from badly scanned ancient Greek texts. It can be valid in Modern Greek, depending on context. For example:
— Πού πήγες χτες βράδι; (Where did you go last night?)
— Ε, κάπου θα πήγα (I must have been somewhere)

Your example is from machine translation (note the gr subdomain, commonly used for that purpose, as well as the fake social media accounts having the conversation):
https://gr.toluna.com/opinions/4580925/%CE%A4%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%BF%CF%85%CE%BD%CE%BF%CE%BA%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B4%CE%B7

Θα είχα γράψει κιόλας does not make much sense Θα είχα ήδη γράψει (I would have already written), does.

It is safer to start with the English phrase you want translated, and then try the Greek one(s); otherwise, it can be all guesswork as to the desired meaning.
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 14:18:39 by spiros »



martinlest

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 16
    • Gender:Male
I get almost 2000 results:

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%CE%B8%CE%B1+%CF%80%CE%AE%CE%B3%CE%B1%22&rlz=1C1PRFC_enGB793GB854&oq=%22&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l3j69i57.2454j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

You may well be right that it was a Google translation, or similar! I never thought of that!

Quote
Θα είχα γραμμένος πιά - makes no sense.

Well I am reading it in my very respected Greek grammar book as I write this - but no matter; it's not something I would ever think of writing.
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 14:25:41 by martinlest »


spiros

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 814140
    • Gender:Male
  • point d’amour
If you keep clicking at the last page number (10) you will get to what I said. Also, junk phrases appear in much higher number than this, where and how they appear makes all the difference about their validity. For example, you could be using a phrase, and have 1000s of results of the phrase broken by full stop (that is, half of it part of one sentence and another half part of a different sentence, which makes it hardly a valid phrase).

In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 126 already displayed.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 14:28:02 by spiros »


martinlest

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 16
    • Gender:Male
Quote
If you keep clicking at the last page number (10) you will get to what I said.

Ah, yes, just so. :-)


billberg23

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 6064
    • Gender:Male
  • Words ail me.
When I Googled "θα πήγα", I got some 2000 results, which added to my confusion as to the meaning and/or correctness. Looking again, I think they are Ancient Greek, though I haven't checked that properly. Does 'θα πήγα' exist in Ancient Greek? I only have a very vague knowledge of it.
I have looked out my Greek grammar book since posting. Definitely written there that this is correct Greek (a second form of the conditional, it says):
Θα είχα γραμμένος πιά (I would have already written)
(with the accent on πιά, though I wouldn't put it, I agree). The book includes a lot of rather old Greek too - so I guess this form must be archaic.
With over 60 years of ancient Greek behind me, I can say with absolute certainty that none of your examples have any connection with ancient Greek.


martinlest

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 16
    • Gender:Male
OK, thanks for confirming.

I suddenly realise (sorry!) what Spiros meant about the 'ς' making no sense on 'θα έχω γραμμένος'!! I thought he meant the whole grammatical structure was wrong. Not sure why I would think that: reading again what he wrote, it was quite clear (not getting any younger - it's my birthday today in fact: yet another nail in the coffin!) and of course I agree. My example should have been something like this, I suppose, I don't know how that sigma got included:

θα έχω το (γράμμα) γραμμένο.... θα έχω τη (σημείωση) γραμμένη....

Even so, it's not a structure that would come to me automatically, whereas θα το/την έγραφα would. Ιs that form more usual/informal in everyday Greek than the one with the participle?
« Last Edit: 02 Jun, 2020, 16:22:07 by martinlest »


 

Search Tools