If I had to guess I’d say we are looking at the same records.
Why not say we were looking at the same records for the present?
And yes, the situation is about the present circumstances.
So were would indicate past? That is exactly my question.
-
2What exactly is your question here? Why is "we were" ungrammatical? It's not; both were and are are perfectly grammatical.– Peter ShorCommented May 12, 2014 at 12:25
-
1@PeterShor: I think that is the question actually: why is are used instead of were - is one of the two wrong or not. I think you answered it though :P– oerkelensCommented May 12, 2014 at 12:32
-
Why would you say "we were" when talking about the present?– 568mlCommented May 12, 2014 at 13:28
-
1Both "were" and "are" would be acceptable here. The "were" would be a backshifted preterite (which is possible because its matrix clause uses a preterite, the "would" in "I'd".)– F.E.Commented May 12, 2014 at 18:09
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
The sentence consists of three clauses:
If I had to guess
I'd say
[that] we are looking at the same records
The first two clauses combine to make a sentence that in pedagogical ESL grammars is usually called Conditional 2 [past tense in the if-clause and would + infinitive in the main clause]. Another example is: If I knew the answer, I would tell you.
The third clause (we are looking at the same records) is not part of the conditional section, and hence its tense is determined by the context of the statement as a whole.
So if you are talking about records that you looked at earlier and no longer have in front of you, then the past tense is required:
If I had to guess I'd say we were looking at the same records.
If you are currently looking together at the records, the present tense is usual:
If I had to guess I'd say we are looking at the same records.
But it is possible that the presence of the conditional in the first part of the sentence might influence some speakers to use were and not are in the third clause.
-
1It's not that hard and fixed. I could say either are or were in this sentence, in the same (present commentary) context, depending on what I wanted to emphasize. If I wanted to reinforce the finality, I'd say are; if I wanted to keep the observation theoretical and allow my addressee to form their own opinion, I'd extend the counterfactual scope of if to cover the complement clause it commands and say were. Sentences do not fit into labelled boxes with rules attached. Commented May 12, 2014 at 15:20
The only incongruence is that "If I had to guess I'd say" sounds rather informal whereas "we were", while perfectly correct as pointed out by Peter Shor, seems much more formal.
