MISCELLANY 275

McCluskey, John. 1981. "Metanalysis and Today's Student." Tennessee Linguistics

1:3-5.
McMillan, James B., and Michael B. Montgomery. 1989. Annotated Bibliography
of Southern American English. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P.
Richardson, Gina. 1984. "Can y'all Function as a Singular Pronoun in Southern
Dialect?" American Speech 59: 51-59.

MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY

University of South Carolina

CLASSIFYING THE ENGLISH CONDITIONALS

English conditionals are not the mystery they are sometimes made out to
be. Katuza (1986), for example, excludes a number of important kinds of

TABLE 1
English Conditionals

Kind of Clause Future Generic Present Past Past-Posterior

Open
Hypothesis S-N S-N is, am, are, PASTS was, were, gonna
V-ing
Contingency will -any verb form (including imperative)-

Closed
Hypothesisa wereto PASTSb PASTSb had[ + 've]c had beengonna
Contingency CNDTL CNDTLCNDTL CNDTL've ;CNDTL've
beengonna
Half-Closed
Hypothesis shouldd should should should've should'vebeen
gonna
Contingency CNDTL CNDTL CNDTL CNDTL've CNDTL've
beengonna
Acquiescing
Hypothesis FUTV/CNDTL
Contingency FUTV (CNDTL)

aTemporal throw-back in hypothesis S-N = Stative-Narrative modality

clause; this applies also to perfects
(see n. 6 in article).
bWas is often respelled were, and must
be when if is omitted.
CSee n. 6 in article for the double
pluperfect.
dPASTS may be used in place of should
in futuritive Hypothesis clauses,
especially if the Contingency precedes
the Hypothesis or if ever is possible.
(e.g., arrives)
FUTV = be gonna, '11,or another of
the nine English futuritive
modalities
PASTS = past, past-progressive
CNDTL = would,could,might,should,
oughtto
276 AMERICAN SPEECH 64.3 (1989)

conditional sentences while missing some generalizations and including

types not current in non-lame' British and American usage among
younger speakers (e.g., I shouldin the independent clause).2 My claim here
is that table 1 is complete and accurate (and very useful for teaching Eng-
lish) with the exception of most of the large number of mixed types and the
special variants discussed later in this article. As a user of the term HY-
POTHESIS CLAUSE for the dependent clause beginning with if (etc.) long be-
fore reading Katuza's paper, I will continue the usage here. The main
clause will be termed the CONTINGENCY CLAUSE.
The stative-narrative forms (e.g., goes, go; see Bailey 1985) are the nor-
mal futuritives in hypothesis clauses, as they also are in temporal clauses
and in relatives embedded under higher futuritives; and the same is true
of future perfects, as in If bytomorrowshehasn'tarrived .3 All views of
markedness known to the author (see Mayerthaler 1981, Bailey 1982, 75,
for some references) accept that, in contast with subordinate clauses in gen-
eral, the unmarked order has the hypothesis clause before the contingency
clause in a conditional sentence.4
Table 1 offers a classification of four basic types of English conditional
sentences: OPEN,where the speaker/writer takes a neutral or noncommittal
stance toward the truth of the hypothesis; CLOSED, counterfactual or, in the
future, extremely unlikely; HALF-CLOSED, or doubtful; and ACQUIESCING,
where the speaker/writer takes a positive view of the hypothesis, accepting
it as true, so that if is equivalent to 'if it is true/granted that .'5
Among the generalizations that any classification of conditionals should
capture is the fact that CNDTL (would,also could, might,should,ought [to];
+ have, if anterior) appears in the contingency clauses of half-closed and
closed conditionals. Should(+ have, if anterior) appears in the hypothesis
clause of half-closed conditionals (with PASTS as an alternative in futuri-
tives). (The half-closed type with shouldin the hypothesis clause is becom-
ing less frequent, but it is not yet as rare as some suppose.) The TEMPORAL
THROWBACK (i.e., the throwing back of the time by one degree that makes
a statement less assertive or an if-clause counterfactual or, if futuritive, very
doubtful; cf. Bailey 1984, 55; 1985, 306-7) appears in closed hypothesis
clauses. And in closed hypothesis clauses, was is (optionally-but decreas-
ingly-though always where if is omitted) respelled as were.(Such usages
also follow wish,It'stime,I'd rather,etc.)
Examples of the various pure types summarized by table 1 are as follows.
1. Open
Future: If she wins, we'llhavea celebration.
If he hasn'tdone it whenthe boss gets there, he'llbe in
trouble.
 MISCELLANY 277

generic: If they (have) live(d) here, they know him.

present: If he's eating, it's okay.
If he's hurrying, don't worry.
past: If he was ready, they left on time.
If he was eating, they had to wait.
past-posterior:If he was gonna leave anyhow, why did you bother to needle
him so much?
2. Closed
future: If they were to try to do that, they'd be blamed by everyone.
generic: If the earth rotated in that direction, whirlpools would
circle differently.
present: If they were (staying) here, she'd be talking to them every
day.
past: If he had('ve)"been staying there, they'd've met him.
past-posterior:If he'd been going to leave early, they'd've known all about
it.
3. Half-closed
future: [see below]
generic: If that should be the way things are, it would really be a sad
situation.
present: If they should be waiting at home, the call could be made
now.
past: If it should've happened like that, they'd've had sense
enough to clear out.
past-posterior:If it should've been going to look likely, we'd've realized
that fact.
4 . Acquiescing
future: If it'll get done anyhow, we're gonna relax.
If you're gonna get 'em to cooperate, you'll have to sweet-
talk 'em.
If it would solve the problem, then I'd better (- I'll) do it
your way.

In acquiescing future conditionals, as in open ones, will is the most likely

futuritive modality in the contingency (note the final example above).
Many mixed types exist. In general, one should classify such types on the
basis of the hypothesis clause, with the term MIXEDprefixed. A very fre-
quent mixed type is the MIXED CLOSED PAST, for example, If that'd beendone
on time, she'd be happy. Other mixed types include If she's done that, I'd be very
surprised;and If she'dbe willing to help, we'llbeagreeableto hertakingcreditfor
the whole thing; and I was ready to do it if we were captured.
As in other half-closed conditionals, the hypothesis of a half-closed fu-
ture conditional may contain should, for example, If she should arrive on time,
they'd be delighted. Intead of should, PASTS are heard also, though not in
every instance in all varieties. Where ever is explicitly present or implicitly
insertable (though not only there), and when the hypothesis clause follows
278 AMERICAN SPEECH 64.3 (1989)

the contingency clause, PASTS sound all right, as in If you built it there,the
neighborswouldobjectand They'dbedelightedif youworkedon it tomorrow.Some
speakers would reject, at least under some conditions (which are not overly
clear) If you workedon it tomorrow,they'dbe delighted.(Given these problems,
the wary foreigner might be advised to prefer the should-wouldconditional
when the hypothesis clause appears-as is usual-before the contingency
clause. Where if is omitted, only the shouldtype is possible: Shouldyou work
on it tomorrow,but not *Worked you on it tomorrow;see below).
Although it is necessary to differentiate restrictive and nonrestrictive hy-
pothesis clauses, the difference affects the form only of paratactic condi-
tionals (see below). Additional note, however, has to be taken of the fact that
some sentences that are conditional in form are not true conditionals, since
the validity of the apparent "contingency"clause is not dependent on the
truth or validity of the hypothesis clause. A useful discussion of INDIRECT
and RHETORICAL conditionals is found in Quirk et al. (1985, 1094-97).
These writers cite indirect hypothesis clauses such as If you don'tmind my
saying so; If I maybe quitefrank; and If I'm correct.The two main rhetorical
types in Quirk et al. are illustrated by If they'reIrish, I'm thePope(a nonre-
strictive type I would dub counteracquiescing); and He's ninetyif he'sa day (a
restrictive type I would also call RHETORICAL). Quirk et al. (1092-93) also
mention the strengthener only, in If only at the beginning of hypothesis
clauses and wishes (e.g., If onlytheyweren'tso old!)
One sort of open conditional can be paratactic in spoken and, increas-
ingly, in written usage; in these cases, if is omitted and a comma or dash
separates the clauses: Youdon'tstudy,youfail. The comma makes this appear
to be nonrestrictive, but that is because of the omitted connectives; the con-
ditional is really restrictive. A more interesting set of variants (written or
spoken mostly in the less-informal styles) deletes if under certain condi-
tions: (1) Subject-verb inversion occurs (e.g. Had he mether);(2) was is non-
optionally respelled as were(as in Weretheypresent);and (3) not may not be
reduced to -n't (*Shouldn'ttheybe at home-for acceptable Shouldtheynot be
at home).Moreover, (4) this type is permitted only with the typical auxili-
aries used in hypothesis clauses-had, were,should,and also could;Quirk et
al. (1094) also mention mightas occasionally occurring here, but this seems
odd to me. Did can occur, but it is quite limited. Ian Trotter (personal
communication) suggests that order may play a role; and the addition
of but helps, as in Did she but know.7

NOTES
1. Lameis the sociolinguisticdesignationof a person not activelytakingpart in
the creativedevelopmentof a language;such a person is out of date and out of
touch-an outsiderwith respectto currentfashions.
 MISCELLANY 279

2. Note, however,I shouldthinkso/not,a use arising out of markedness-reversal in

a marked environment. The use here, as in She was disgustedthat I should('ve)put it
there,is what is called a realis one, reversing in an environment of annoyance the
usual irrealissense of shouldin conditional and temporal clauses. (I shouldlike is a
fossilized expression used in letter-writing.) Semantic and pragmatic reversals of
the English verb modalities in conditionals, partially treated in Bailey (1984), will
be more fully expounded in an article in preparation. On the term SUBJUNCTIVE,
used by Katuza and other writers, see Bailey (1985). See Bailey (forthcoming) on
should.
3. The term STATIVE-NARRATIVE MODALITY in place of PRESENT SIMPLE TENSE is
justified at length in Bailey (1985).
4. In this context, markedand markednessrefer to nothing more complicated than
phenomena which are in some sense special-relatively to the corresponding un-
markedphenomena they imply. (That the concept is a gradient one-some marked
phenomena can be more or less marked than other marked phenomena-need not
concern us here.) A markerbelongs to the form, e.g., the -s in arrives. Mayerthaler
(1981) takes the position that what is marked to a given degree should be markered
to a corresponding degree if the language is to keep its nose clean ("constructional
iconicity"). For technical concepts of markedness, see Bailey (1984).
5. If you'regonna do that and If you'llnotfail to do that can be explained as equiv-
alent to If it is true/grantedthatyou'regonna (- you'll notfail to) do that . If she
wouldbe left out expresses acquiescence in a contingency. For the underlying seman-
tactic structure, see Bailey (1984, 61-62), where further information on would is
provided.
6. What I term the DOUBLE PLUPERFECT, found in colloquial hypothesis clauses,
is discussed by several correspondents in EnglishToday(April 1986, 28-29), to which
I replied in the same journal (July 1986, 5), making reference to Mayerthaler's
(1981) principle of "constructional iconicity" and to Bailey (1986), as well as other
work of my own. A double perfect (with temporal throw-back) occurs in closed-fu-
ture hypothesis clauses, e.g., If they'dabeentherebynext week
7. FortheSOLEMN use (by politicians, preachers, and those emulating them) of ar-
chaic be in clauses beginning with whether,if, and unless, see Bailey (1985, 314).

REFERENCES

Bailey, Charles-James N. 1982. On the Yin and YangNatureof Language. Ann Arbor:
Karoma.
. 1984. "Markedness-Reversaland the Pragmatic Principle of 'Reading Be-
tween the Lines in the Presence of Marked Usages.' "PapierezurLinguistik31: 43-
100.
. 1985. "IrrealisModalities and the Misnamed 'Present Simple Tense' in Eng-
lish."Languageand Communication5: 297-314.
. 1986. "EvenDialectologists Get the Blues: Inadequate Phonetic Transcrip-
tion of English." Papierezur Linguistik35: 3-38.
. Forthcoming. "Unriddling Analytical Paradoxes."Essayson Time-BasedLin-
guisticAnalysis.Oxford: Oxford UP.
Kaiuza, Jan. 1986. "A New Look at Conditional Sentences in English." ELTJournal
40: 59-60.
Mayerthaler,Willi. 1981.Morphologische Natiirlichkeit.Wiesbaden: Athenaion.
280 AMERICAN SPEECH 64.3 (1989)

Quirk,Randolph,SidneyGreenbaum,GeoffreyLeech, andJan Svartvik.1985.A

Grammarof theEnglish Language. London: Longman.
Comprehensive

CHARLES-JAMES N. BAILEY
Technische Universitdt Berlin

A NOTE ON THE GREASYIGREAZY ISOGLOSS

IN EAST-CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA

One of the most salient phonological makers of the dialects of the

Eastern United States, first studied systematically by George Hempl in
1896, is the pronunciation of the fricative in the word greasy. As Kurath
and McDavid (1961, 176) observe: "Voiceless /s/ and voiced /z/ are cur-
rent in this word in remarkably clear-cut regional dissemination." Gen-
erally speaking, the Northern Area is charcterized by the voiceless
fricative and the Midland and Southern Areas by the voiced fricative,
although there is a "relatively narrow" transitional area ("where both [s]
and [z] are used") "to the west of Philadelphia" (Atwood 1950, 428).'
According to the data compiled by the Linguistic Atlas of the United
States and Canada (LAUSC) project during the 1930s and 1940s, "in
areas of divided usage. .. the social and age distribution is erratic and
does not permit of any inference as to present trends in usage" (Kurath
and McDavid 1961, 177; cf. Atwood 1950, 429-30); and Atwood (1950,
433) maintained that "it seems unlikely . . . the lines on ... greasy have
shifted radically in the last few years." As part of a larger dialect survey
of eastern Pennsylvania, I have recently investigated the current status
of the pronunciation of the word greasy in a number of the counties
originally showing divided usage-Chester, Dauphin, Lancaster, and
York-in southeastern Pennsylvania on (or near) the Maryland border.
My research leads me to believe that in the last half century there have
been some significant changes in trends of usage in these transitional
areas and that the boundaries clearly separating the /z/ and /s/ variants
have indeed shifted in this part of Pennsylvania. Specifically, the fricative
/s/ has now attained near universality, except in York County.
INFORMANTS.Informants for this study were 70 native-born, life-long
residents of Chester, Dauphin, Lancaster, and York Counties who had
had no extended lapses in residence. They constituted a heterogeneous
group with respect to age, education, occupation, and sex. Lancaster
County is especially well represented by a large number of informants
because Atwood (1950, 430, n. 10) explicitly identifies it as an area char-
acterized by both phonological variants.