Now this is confusing... I wanna know the difference between the following sentences:

If you were there, I would see you.

If you had been there, I would have seen you.

What's the difference between 'were' and 'had been'? And could we use 'were' instead of 'had been' in the 2nd sentence?

  • The first one is effectively a "subjunctive" usage where the "I would see you" part strongly implies either a "present tense irrealis" (you're not there right now - but if you were, I'd see you), OR a future situation (if you were to be there at some point in the future, I would see you then). Aug 22, 2014 at 20:36
  • 1
    Both are subjunctive; the first is past (or were) subjunctive and could be described, in ESL terms, as second conditional, which states a present counterfactual as @FumbleFingers above has said; the second is the "pluperfect/past perfect" (emphasis on the quotes) subjunctive and, in ESL, is called third conditional, which states a past counterfactual (something happened in the past and if it hadn't, x would be the result). Aug 22, 2014 at 21:06
  • You will find this Wiki article helpful. It is on the question of 'conditional sentences', i.e. ones that begin with 'if'. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_conditional_sentences
    – WS2
    Aug 22, 2014 at 21:14
  • Shouldn't this be on English Language Learners ?
    – Kris
    Aug 23, 2014 at 6:08

3 Answers 3


Scenario #1 - It is the present (now) and you are not here:

"If you were there, I would see you."

Scenario #2 - In the past and you were not there

"If you had been there, I would have seen you."

Scenario #3 - In the future

"If you are here tomorrow, I will see you."

In the first two cases, are counter-factual

  • 1
    Not sure it's that simple: Scenario 1: If you were there tomorrow I would see you (future). Scenario 2: If you'd been in the line up tomorrow I would have seen you (future). Scenario 3 If you're there tomorrow, I'll see you. (future) Aug 23, 2014 at 0:01
  • @Araucaria I'm struggling to think of a context in which your scenario 2 would see use, if it's even a valid construction.
    – Wlerin
    Aug 23, 2014 at 1:39

It feels like the first two scenarios are subjunctive, but the last one is conditional. "If you were there" is an English subjunctive mood. The indicative mood for the pronoun I is was, but since it's subjunctive we use were.


If you are there, I will see you. (Future main clause, subject to the action in dependent clause)

If you were there, I would see you. Here, both the actions didn't happen. It's like, I couldn't meet you because you were not there.

If you had been there, I would have seen/ met you. Similar to the second example; subjunctive; as both the actions didn't take place.

The difference in the second and third will be clear when used in reported speech. E.g., Direct speech: He said to Joe, "If you are at home, I shall meet you. Reported speech: He said to Joe that if Joe was at home, he would meet him.

Direct speech: He said, "As she was sleeping, I did not disturb her." Reported speech: He said as she had been sleeping, he hadn't disturbed her."

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.