Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: If I knew then...

http://crime.about.com/od/history/a/amy_book.htm
non si dovrebbe dire
if (only) I had know...
?
sciao... :-)
 >G

):

The simple past can be used here.
If you want to use the past perfect, your example would be:
If (only) I had knowN...
-- 
Joey from NY

 If (only) I had knowN...
thank you I had dropped the n out of hurry...

):

I suppose it's because it's just a simple statement, without any other past 
event qualifiers.
If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't be poor today.
If I had known then that the stock was bogus before I invested my entire life 
savings in it, I wouldn't be poor now.
(Even in this case you could say "If I knew then that the stock was 
bogus...")
--
If I saw the opportunity, I would take it.
If I had seen the opportunity (before I acted), I would have taken it.
--
If you let (past tense) the cat out of the bag, it's your own fault.
If you had let the cat ouf of the bag, you would have suffered the 
consequences.
(It's early and my caffeine hasn't kicked in yet. If I was hasty in my 
examples, I apologize. If my caffeine had kicked in, I would probably have 
come up with some better phrases. :)
This is AE where maybe sequence of tenses isn't so strictly followed any 
more.
-- 
Joey from NY

 If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't be poor today.
a me questa frase suona sbagliata.
forse semplicemente 'si usa'...
forse è come 'it's time you went' e 'it's time you go'. senti tutte e 
due le cose.
ancora non ho capito se c'è differenza.

 a me questa frase suona sbagliata.
It isn't.
-- 
Joey from NY

 It isn't.
neither does: 'Se mi nonno c'aveva tre palle era 'n flipper.'
but it's wrong.
can't it be that it's accepted but bad english, anyway? or under which 
'rule' shall i find it looking up in the grammar?
grazie thank you (cit)
 >Giovanni

):

What part of it sounds wrong to you? How are you suggesting it should read 
instead?
The example you gave is of what I perceive to be regional dialect or slang, 
which this isn't.
An example of that in English would be something like: If I'd-a knew then 
what I know now, I wouldn't be poor today.
Again: what is your 'remedy' for what you perceive to be 'accepted but bad 
English.'?
-- 
Joey from NY

):

http://esl.about.com/od/gramma1/a/conditional.htm
<quote>
Conditional 2
Often called the "unreal" conditional because it is used for unreal - 
impossible or improbable - situations. This conditional provides an imaginary 
result for a given situation.
NOTE
The verb 'to be', when used in the 2nd conditional, is always conjugated as 
'were'.
If he studied more, he would pass the exam.
I would lower taxes if I were the President.
They would buy a new house if they had more money.
<end quote>
If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't be poor today.  :)
-- 
Joey from NY

 English.'?
I don't understand.
It has happened before that my instinct for bad placed. I just want to 
be sure.
ciao
 >Giovanni

 Conditional 2
I think what we're dealing with here is Conditional 3, because it 
concerns a past situation:
sometime in the past I was ignorant, and I didn't know. That lead me to 
poverty. I wish I had know. If only I had known...who knows what would 
have happened?
Anyway I don't quite get the difference between 0 and 1...
ciao
 >Giovanni

 'rule' shall i find it looking up in the grammar?
In my opinion, it would be better English to say "If I had known then 
what I know now..." but I don't believe that it is actually incorrect to 
say "If I knew then what I know now." I don't think it is just a matter 
of accepted usage, I believe that it's a correct variation. One must 
remember that "la concordanza" in Italian is more rigid than compound 
sentence tense agreement in English.

 sentence tense agreement in English.
I see. I'm aware too that I tend to get stucked into rigid schemes....I 
actually look for them, almost crave for them.
I'm told also that English does have rules, almost as strick as German. 
Too bad that nobody (no Italian at least) knows them...
The same is for Italian and all the languages, I suppose.
Take "se stesso" for instance. "sé" is written with the accent all the 
times, *expect* when in "se stesso" (or similar).
Why?
Nobody seems to know.
Also for "io do", and "egli dà", we are unsure of whether it could 
instead be "egli da'" or "io dò"...who knows?
ciao
 >Giovanni