Conditionals

A. will get ✓

This sentence needs a future tense verb because "if people eat too much" describes a condition that leads to a future result. "Will get" correctly shows what happens next.

• B. got - Past tense; doesn't fit a sentence about what will happen
• C. gotten - Past participle; needs an auxiliary verb like "have" to work
• D. getting - Present participle; can't stand alone as the main verb in this structure

A. will be ✓
This is a conditional sentence (If + present, will + verb). The structure shows a future consequence: IF you're late, THEN I will be angry in the future.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. am — Present tense doesn't fit; you need future tense for the result.
- C. being — This gerund form isn't grammatically correct in this conditional structure.
- D. be — Bare infinitive needs an auxiliary verb like "will" before it.

A. would go ✓

This is a second conditional sentence (hypothetical/unreal situation). It uses "if + past tense" to show something that *isn't* actually happening, then "would + base verb" for the imaginary result. The sentence means they *don't* have time now, but *if* they did, they would go.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. will go – This is future tense, used for real possibilities, not hypothetical situations
- C. goes – Present tense doesn't fit; we need conditional form, not simple present
- D. gone – This is past participle; it doesn't work grammatically here (would need "would have gone" for past conditionals)

Why A is correct:
"Would have" (not shown complete here, but "would" is the right auxiliary) is used for unreal past situations—things that didn't happen. Since they *didn't* play better and *didn't* win, this conditional is correct.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (will have): This is future perfect tense, but the sentence clearly refers to the past ("if we had played"), not the future.
- C (will had): This is grammatically incorrect; "will" and "had" don't combine this way.
- D (has): Present perfect tense doesn't fit a past conditional situation, and it doesn't match the structure needed here.

A. would have won ✓

This is a past unreal conditional — it describes something that didn't happen in the past. The structure "if we had played" (past perfect in the condition) pairs with "would have won" (would + have + past participle) to express a hypothetical outcome that never occurred.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. would win — This is present conditional, but the "if" clause is clearly about the past ("had played"), so tense mismatch.
- C. will win — This is future tense, which doesn't fit a past hypothetical situation.
- D. had won — This only works in the "if" clause, not the main clause; it doesn't express the hypothetical result.

Correct answer: A. doesn't rain

• This uses the zero conditional structure: "If + present simple, will + verb." We need the present tense in the if-clause.
• "Doesn't rain" is the correct present tense form (third person singular with "it").
• The meaning makes sense: we'll go if rain doesn't happen.

Why the others are wrong:

• B (will rain) – Uses future tense in the if-clause, which breaks the conditional rule. We don't use "will" after "if."
• C (rains) – While this is present tense, "rains" is third person singular without the negative. It means the opposite: "if it rains, we'll go," which doesn't fit the intended meaning.
• D (rain) – This is a base verb form, not conjugated for third person singular. After "it," we need "rains" or "doesn't rain."

A. studies ✓

This uses the first conditional (if + present simple, will + base verb), which expresses a real, possible future situation. The structure is: "If she studies harder, she will pass."

Why the others are wrong:

• B. is studying – Present continuous doesn't fit the if-clause in first conditionals; we need simple present
• C. studied – Past tense suggests something that didn't happen; this would be second conditional (unreal situation)
• D. study – Missing the subject-verb agreement; "she" requires "studies," not "study"

A is correct: "Will go" is the future tense, which matches the conditional "if it is hot" (a future possibility). This is the proper grammar for expressing what you'll do in a future situation.

B is wrong: "I go" is present tense, which doesn't show this is something you'd do in the future.

C is wrong: "Will went" mixes future ("will") with past tense ("went")—you can't use both together.

D is wrong: "Will gone" also mixes tenses incorrectly (future + past participle). After "will," you always need the base form of the verb ("go," not "went" or "gone").

A. win ✓

This sentence uses "if" to talk about a condition that might happen in the future. In English, we use the simple present tense (not future tense) after "if" in conditional sentences—so "win" is correct.

Why the others are wrong:

• B. won — Past tense; this would suggest the game already happened, which doesn't fit the "if" condition.
• C. are winning — Present continuous; this describes something happening right now, not a future possibility.
• D. will win — We don't use "will" directly after "if" in conditionals; "if" already expresses the future idea.

Correct answer: were

This sentence uses a conditional statement ("If I... I would...") that describes an imaginary or hypothetical situation, not a real one. In English, hypothetical situations require the subjunctive mood, which uses "were" for all subjects (I, you, he, she, it, we, they). So "If I were you" is the proper form.

Why the others are wrong:
- am, are, is – These are indicative mood forms used for real, factual situations. They don't work in hypothetical "if" clauses like this one.

Why A is correct:
"If you arrive late" uses the simple present tense, which is the standard way to express a general condition or possibility. This structure (if + present tense) describes what *could* happen.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (arrived) – Past tense doesn't fit; you're talking about a future possibility, not something that already happened.
- C (arrives) – This uses third person singular (he/she/it), but "you" is second person, so the verb form doesn't match.
- D (arriving) – A gerund (verb+ing) doesn't work here; you need a conjugated verb after "if you."

Correct answer: A. rains

• This is a first conditional sentence (real/likely future possibility), which requires present simple tense in the if-clause: "If it rains..."
• The main clause uses "will stay," so the if-clause must use simple present, not will/shall.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (rain): Missing the third-person singular "-s" ending; "it" is singular and needs "rains"
- C (rained): Past tense doesn't fit; this isn't about what already happened
- D (raining): Present continuous isn't the right form for conditional sentences

A. save is correct because this sentence needs the simple present tense in an "if" clause that describes a future condition. The structure is: "If + present tense, + will + verb" (e.g., "If I save enough money, I will buy a car").

B. saved is wrong—past tense doesn't work here; we're talking about a future situation, not something that already happened.

C. saves is wrong—this is third person singular (he/she/it saves), but "I" is first person, so we need "save."

D. saving is wrong—a gerund (verb + -ing) doesn't fit the grammatical structure needed after "if" in conditional sentences.

Why A is correct:
This sentence uses a conditional structure (if + present tense, will + verb). "Passes" is the correct present tense form that matches this pattern: "If she passes the exam, she will be very happy."

Why the others are wrong:
- B (pass): Missing the third-person singular "-s" ending. "She" requires "passes," not "pass."
- C (passed): This is past tense, but the sentence describes a future possibility, not something that already happened.
- D (passing): This is a gerund/present participle form that doesn't fit the grammatical structure needed here.

A. need help ✓

This is correct because it uses the simple present tense in a conditional clause (the "if" part), which is the standard grammar rule for real or likely situations.

B. are needing help — The continuous form sounds awkward here; we don't use "are needing" in conditional clauses about general situations.

C. will need help — We don't use "will" in the conditional part of an if-statement; "will" goes in the main clause ("I will help you").

D. need help for — This adds an unnecessary preposition; "need help" stands alone without "for."

A. rains ✓

This uses the correct conditional structure: "If + present tense, will + verb." When talking about a possible future event in an if-clause, you use present tense, not future tense.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. will rain — You don't use "will" in the if-clause; that goes in the main clause only
- C. rain — Missing the third-person singular "-s" needed because the subject "it" requires it
- D. is raining — This suggests it's already raining now, not a possible future event

A. she will pass ✓

This is correct because it uses a first conditional (if + present, will + base verb). When we talk about a likely future result of a present action, we need "will pass."

B. she passed — Wrong tense. Past tense doesn't fit a sentence about studying now and a test in the future.

C. she will be passed — Passive voice and awkward. "Pass" is active here (she passes the test), not passive.

D. she would pass — This suggests a hypothetical or unlikely situation ("if she *were* to study"). Since the condition is realistic, we use "will," not "would."

Correct Answer: A. we will miss

This is a first conditional sentence (if + present, will + verb) used for real, likely future situations. Since "if we don't leave now" is present tense, the main clause must use "will + verb" to show the probable future consequence.

Why the others are wrong:

• B. we miss – Simple present tense doesn't work here; you need "will" to show future consequence.
• C. we would miss – This is second conditional (for imaginary/unlikely situations), but leaving now is a real possibility, not hypothetical.
• D. we will be missed – Wrong verb form; it's passive voice and changes the meaning (people missing us, not us missing the train).

Correct answer: A. he will solve

This uses the future tense ("will solve"), which is correct because the sentence has "if he agrees" (a condition in present tense), and we need future tense for the result. This matches the pattern: "If + present, will + base verb."

Why the others are wrong:
- B (he is solving): Present continuous tense doesn't fit—we're talking about what *will happen*, not what's happening now.
- C (he will be solving): Future continuous is wrong here—we don't need the "-ing" form; we need a simple future action.
- D (he solves): Simple present doesn't work—this would sound like a general fact, not a future result of the condition.

A. rains ✓

This sentence uses a conditional structure: "If [condition], we will [result]." The condition uses simple present tense ("rains"), even though the result is in the future ("will cancel"). In English conditionals, we use present tense in the "if" clause, not future tense.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. rained — Past tense doesn't fit; we're talking about a possible future event, not something that already happened
- C. rain — Missing the third-person singular verb ending (-s); "it" requires "rains," not "rain"
- D. rainy — This is an adjective, not a verb; the sentence needs an action verb after "if"

Why A is correct:
This uses the first conditional (present simple + will/future), which shows a real or likely future consequence. "If you don't complete your homework, you will get a lower grade" expresses a natural cause-and-effect relationship.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (didn't complete): This is past tense, but the sentence needs present tense to show a future condition.
- C (won't complete): This uses future tense in the "if" clause, which breaks the first conditional structure (you need present tense before "will").
- D (haven't completed): This is present perfect, which suggests something already happened—but we're talking about a hypothetical future situation.

A. had ✓
This uses the conditional past tense ("if I had..."), which is the correct structure for imaginary or hypothetical situations. It means "if I possessed money right now, I could buy candy."

B. have ✗
Present tense doesn't work here—"if I have" suggests something that's actually true now, not a hypothetical situation.

C. will have ✗
Future tense breaks the logic—you can't say "if I will have money, I could buy candy" because it mixes future and conditional in a confusing way.

D. is having ✗
Present continuous doesn't fit the structure and sounds unnatural for this conditional sentence.

Correct answer: A. calls

This sentence uses a conditional structure: "If [present tense], [future tense]." The "if" clause must use present tense ("calls") even though it refers to a future possibility. This is standard conditional grammar in English.

Why the others are wrong:

• B. calling – This is a gerund/participle form, not a proper verb; it doesn't work in conditional sentences.
• C. called – Past tense doesn't fit; the condition is about a future possibility, not something that already happened.
• D. call – While "call" is present tense, it's missing the third-person singular "-s" needed because the subject "she" requires this ending.

Why A is correct:
This sentence needs a present tense verb to match the future condition ("will start"). "Are" is the correct present tense form for the plural subject "they."

Why the others are wrong:
- B (were) – This is past tense or subjunctive, but the sentence requires present tense for a real conditional situation.
- C (be) – This is the base verb form; it needs a helping verb like "may" or "will" to work here, which the sentence doesn't have.
- D (is) – This is singular ("he/she/it"), but "they" is plural and requires "are."

A. had ✓

This sentence describes an imaginary or hypothetical situation, which requires the past tense in an if-clause. "If I had a million dollars" is the correct conditional form (second conditional).

Why the others are wrong:

• B. have – Present tense doesn't work for hypothetical situations; this would mean you actually have the money now.
• C. has – Wrong subject-verb agreement; "I" takes "had," not "has" (which goes with "he/she/it").
• D. will – Future tense doesn't fit in if-clauses; you'd say "I will buy" in the main clause instead.

A. went ✓

This is a second conditional sentence (hypothetical situation). It uses the past tense to describe something that isn't actually happening now. The structure is: "If + past tense, would + base verb." She doesn't actually go to bed early, so we use "went" to show this unreal situation.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. goes — Present tense doesn't work here; this would suggest she actually does go to bed early
- C. go — Base form is incorrect; conditionals need proper tense markers
- D. will go — Future tense is wrong; this would be first conditional (real possibility), not second conditional (hypothetical)

Correct answer: A. studied

This is a second conditional sentence (an "if" statement about an imaginary or unlikely situation). It uses: if + past tense ... would + base verb. "Studied" is the past tense form needed here.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. study – Present tense doesn't work in second conditional; this would make it sound like a general fact, not hypothetical
- C. studies – Wrong form entirely; third person doesn't fit (and it's still present tense, which doesn't work)
- D. will study – Future tense belongs in first conditional ("If they study hard, they will pass"), not second conditional

Correct answer: A (missed)

This is a second conditional sentence, which describes an imaginary or unlikely situation in the present/future. The pattern is: "If + past tense, would + verb." Since we're imagining a hypothetical scenario ("if we missed the train"), we use past tense (*missed*), not present or future forms.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (miss) – Present tense doesn't work; second conditionals need past tense in the if-clause
- C (will miss) – Future tense is for real possibilities (first conditional: "if we miss, we will..."), not imaginary ones
- D (misses) – Third-person singular doesn't fit; the subject "we" requires the base past form

Why A is correct:
This uses the past tense in a conditional sentence ("if he took...he would be"). This structure expresses an unreal or hypothetical situation in the present/future.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (takes) - Present tense doesn't work with "would be" (the conditional result). You'd say "If he takes exercise, he is healthier" (real situation).
- C (take) - No verb form; grammatically incorrect.
- D (will take) - Future tense doesn't fit the pattern. "If he will take" sounds awkward and isn't standard conditional grammar.

Why A is correct:
This is a second conditional sentence (imaginary situation). It needs "had" (past tense) + "would" to show something that *isn't* true now but could happen if conditions changed.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (has): Present tense doesn't work with "would"—this breaks the conditional structure
- C (have): Same problem; present tense doesn't match the "would" in the result clause
- D (will have): Future tense suggests this *will* happen, but second conditionals describe imaginary or unlikely situations, not real future plans

Correct answer: A. rained

This sentence uses the second conditional structure (if + past tense, would + verb), which describes hypothetical or unlikely situations. "If it rained tonight, they would stay home" means we're imagining a possible but uncertain scenario.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. rain — Present tense doesn't work with "would"; this breaks the conditional structure
- C. will rain — Future tense contradicts the conditional; "will rain" + "would stay" is grammatically incorrect
- D. is raining — Present continuous doesn't fit the conditional pattern; it suggests something happening now, not a hypothetical situation

Correct Answer: A. sang

This is a second conditional sentence (unreal/hypothetical situation). It follows the pattern "If + past tense, would + verb," which expresses something that isn't true now but could happen if conditions changed. "If he sang well" = he doesn't sing well now, but if he did, he would sign up.

Why the others are wrong:

• B. sings – Present tense doesn't fit the conditional structure; this would be first conditional (real possibility), which doesn't match "would sign up"
• C. will sing – Future tense doesn't work here; second conditional requires past tense in the "if" clause
• D. is singing – Present progressive doesn't fit; again, you need simple past for second conditional

Why A is correct:
"Won" is the past conditional form. It correctly completes the sentence "If you won a million dollars..." — this is a hypothetical situation (not real), so we use the past tense after "if" in English conditionals.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (win): This is present tense and doesn't work with the "if" conditional structure.
- C (will win): This is future tense, but conditionals use past tense to show something isn't real/certain.
- D (are winning): This is present progressive and doesn't fit the conditional pattern needed here.

A. had ✓

This is a second conditional sentence (imaginary/hypothetical situation). It uses the pattern "if + past tense, would + verb." The word "had" shows this is unreal—they don't actually have more time, but we're imagining what would happen if they did.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. have – Present tense doesn't work for conditionals; it suggests a real situation, not imaginary
- C. has – Wrong subject-verb agreement (they = plural, so can't use "has")
- D. will have – Future tense breaks the conditional pattern; you need past tense in the "if" clause

Correct answer: A. had studied

This sentence describes a hypothetical past situation that didn't happen (she didn't study hard, so she didn't pass). The "would have passed" part signals we need a past perfect condition. "Had studied" is the correct form for this type of unreal past conditional.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (studied) - Simple past, but doesn't match the "would have" structure needed for past conditionals
- C (studies) - Present tense; the sentence is clearly about the past
- D (was studying) - Past continuous, but doesn't pair correctly with "would have passed"

Correct answer: A. had woken

This sentence uses a past conditional structure (the "if" clause describes an imaginary past situation). You need the past perfect tense "had woken" to show that waking up earlier would have happened before missing the train.

Why the others don't work:
- B. wake — Present tense doesn't fit a past conditional sentence.
- C. woke — Simple past suggests something actually happened; it doesn't express the hypothetical "what if" meaning needed here.
- D. was waking — Past continuous doesn't work in conditional "if" clauses; it also sounds awkward and unfinished.

A. had driven ✓

This is a mixed conditional sentence about a past situation that didn't happen as it should have. The structure "If they had driven... they wouldn't have had..." uses the past perfect in the "if" clause to show what *should* have happened but didn't. This is the correct form for this type of regret about the past.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. drive – present tense; doesn't fit a past situation
- C. drove – simple past; not strong enough for this conditional structure (you need past perfect)
- D. was driving – past continuous; changes the meaning and doesn't match the conditional pattern

Correct Answer: A. would have found

This sentence describes a past situation that didn't happen (you *did* lose your way). The "if I hadn't lost my way" is a past condition, so you need the past conditional: "would have + past participle." This structure means "I would have found it, but I didn't, because I lost my way."

Why the others are wrong:

• B. find – Present tense doesn't match the past condition; also too simple for this situation
• C. found – Simple past suggests it actually happened, but the "if" clause shows it didn't
• D. was finding – Past continuous doesn't work here; doesn't express the conditional meaning you need

Correct answer: A. would have won

This sentence describes a hypothetical situation in the past—something that didn't actually happen because of the injury. The structure "if + past perfect (hadn't been), would have + past participle" is the correct grammar for third conditional sentences. It shows what *would have* happened under different circumstances.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (win) – Present tense doesn't fit; we're talking about the past.
- C (won) – Simple past suggests it actually happened, but the "if" clause tells us it didn't.
- D (was winning) – Past continuous doesn't work with this conditional structure; it also doesn't complete the hypothetical correctly.

Why A is correct:
This sentence needs the past perfect tense ("had studied") because it's a conditional statement about something that didn't happen in the past. The structure "If you had studied... you would have passed" expresses a contrary-to-fact situation.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (studied): Simple past doesn't work here—we need the past perfect to show this is a hypothetical about the past, not something that actually occurred
- C (study): Present tense makes no sense in a past-focused conditional
- D (would study): This is future conditional; it doesn't fit the past-tense context of "would have passed"

Correct answer: A. would have gone hiking

This uses the past perfect conditional (would have + past participle), which is the correct structure for describing an imaginary situation in the past. The sentence says "if it hadn't rained" (past condition that didn't happen), so you need "would have gone" (what would have happened as a result).

Why the others are wrong:
- B (go hiking): Present tense doesn't match a past conditional situation.
- C (will go hiking): Future tense doesn't work with "if it hadn't rained" (a past event).
- D (had gone hiking): Past perfect alone doesn't express the conditional result; it just describes a past event.

A. had driven ✓

This describes a past hypothetical—something that didn't happen in the past but could have prevented a problem. The structure "if + had driven... wouldn't have had" is the correct past unreal conditional.

Why the others are wrong:
- B. drive – Present tense; doesn't fit a past situation
- C. drove – Simple past; describes what actually happened, not a hypothetical alternative
- D. will drive – Future tense; the accident already occurred, so we can't use future tense

Correct answer: A. wouldn't have forgiven

This sentence describes a past hypothetical—something that would have happened in the past if a condition hadn't been met. You need the past conditional: "wouldn't have" + past participle. Since you *did* call her, she *did* forgive you.

Why the others are wrong:

• B (didn't forgive): Simple past tense—states what actually happened, not a hypothetical outcome.
• C (wouldn't forgive): Present conditional—talks about the future, not the past.
• D (haven't forgiven): Present perfect—doesn't fit the hypothetical, past-focused meaning.

Correct answer: A. had trained

This is a third conditional sentence, which describes a hypothetical past situation. The structure is "if + had + past participle, + would have + past participle." Since they didn't train harder in the past and didn't win, we need the past perfect tense "had trained" to show this unreal past condition.

Why the others are wrong:
- B (trained) – Simple past tense; doesn't match the conditional structure needed here
- C (train) – Present tense; the situation is about the past, not present or future
- D (would train) – This goes in the main clause, not the "if" clause; it's also wrong tense for this meaning