Lesson: Conditional Sentences

Thanks for taking the time to say that!
Cheers,
Brent

That's correct. In fact, in 3rd conditionals, it's impossible to meet the given condition.

The video plays for me (and I haven't heard any similar complaints).
It sounds like a problem with your Web browser. Please clear the cache on your browser and let me know if that resolves the issue. Here are the instructions for clearing your cache: https://kb.iu.edu/d/ahic

Can you give me examples of 1) and 2)?

The 2nd and 3rd conditionals could also be referred to as subjunctive moods (featuring "would"). As far as what I've seen (with regard to official GMAT questions), this is all you need to know about subjunctive moods.

No, I don't believe you'll find that construction tested on the GMAT.

Thanks! I'm glad you like them.

This fits the structure of a 3rd conditional. Think of it this way:

(If) our classmates HAD been left to their own devices, (then) Jem and I WOULD HAVE had several fights.

No problem.

I think I already addressed the second "would have" in the sentence

In the first instance (The children WOULD HAVE never thought that up for themselves), there is an implied antecedent. The implied antecedent is "If the parents had not discussed the matter with their children THEN..."

By the way, here's the entire passage from To Kill a Mockingbird:

The adults in Maycomb never discussed the case with Jem and me; it seemed that they discussed it with their children, and their attitude must have been that neither of us could help having Atticus for a parent, so their children must be nice to us in spite of him. The children would never have thought that up for themselves: had our classmates been left to their own devices, Jem and I would have had several swift, satisfying fist-fights apiece and ended the matter for good. As it was, we were compelled to hold our heads high and be, respectively, a gentleman and a lady.

For the purposes of the GMAT, all we need to know about subjunctives is covered in the section on "Second Conditionals" in the above video.

Here's the link to the question you're asking about: https://gmatclub.com/forum/despite-protests-from-some-waste-disposal-com...

FROM THE OFFICIAL GUIDE: "the state's orders can be expressed using either of two idioms: order x to be y or order that x be y".

In the first idiom (order x to be y), x must be an entity that can accept/respond to orders. For example, we might "order Jane to be more careful."

Answer choice A suggests that we "order the levels of bacteria in seawater at popular..."

We can't order levels of bacteria to do anything. So, we can eliminate A.

For similar reasons, we can eliminate C and D, because they suggest that we order sea water (or the bacteria) to do something.

So, it looks like we'll be using the second idiom: order that x be y

In answer choice B, we have "...ORDERED that seawater at popular beaches SHOULD be measured for their levels of bacteria, with the results being..."

There's a big mismatch in meanings here. We don't ORDER that something SHOULD happen. So, eliminate B.

So, by the process of elimination, answer choice E is correct.

ASIDE #1: many students that answer choice E needs a second "be" to be parallel (as in "...ordered that the levels of bacteria in seawater at popular beaches BE measured and the results BE..."). However, the second BE is optional, since the word can also be implied.

Consider the following:
1) Kyle likes TO run, TO ski and TO swim.
2) Kyle likes TO run, ski and swim.

Both of the above sentences are fine. In the 2nd sentence, the 2nd and 3rd TO's are implied.

The same goes for BE.
1) Kyle's goal is TO BE happy and TO BE healthy.
2) Kyle's goal is to BE happy and BE healthy.
3) Kyle's goal is to BE happy and healthy.
All of these sentences are correct.

ASIDE #2: There's a nice discussion of this question here: https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/og-review-10th-sc-92-t1598.html

Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-recent-and-popular-self-help-book-wryly-not...

In this case, WERE is not functioning as the plural version of the WAS. WERE is the verb we use when dealing with conditional sentences involving a strictly HYPOTHETICAL event.

Some examples:
- If the twins WERE more responsible, their parents would let them run with scissors.

- If Joan WERE faster, she would would make an ideal rugby player.

Notice that we use WERE for the plural subject TWINS as well as the singular subject JOAN.

More here: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/conditional-sentences-was-instead-of-were/

Hi Gaurav666,

Glad you like the videos. Thanks for taking the time to say that!

Cheers,
Brent

As I mention below, I'd rather not comment on third-party Verbal questions.
That said, I will tell you that 2nd and 3rd conditionals are also be referred to as subjunctive moods/cases (featuring "would").

Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/whether-they-will-scale-back-their-orders-to-...

The authors used the present perfect tense HAS PROPOSED to indicate that management's proposal may continue into the present and future.

More here: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-sentence-correction/video/1178

PROPOSED (alone) suggests that the proposal occurred in the past and is no longer valid.