If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Verbal Exam > Verbal Questions > If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I...

Join the Discussion on the App

If I was you, then I would not do that.

a)
If I were you, I would not do that.
b)
If I were you, then I would not have done that.
c)
If I was you, then I would not do that.
d)
If I had been you, I would not have done that.

Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Spotting Errors- 3

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do...

The subjunctive mood (If I were.) - "in grammar, subjunctive mood designates the mood of a verb used to express condition, hypothesis, contingency, possibility, etc., rather than to state an actual fact: distinguished from imperative, indicative." Also, in modern English "If I was you ..." is completely incorrect. If.... then as a conjunction is best avoided, though it is not always incorrect; 'if' would suffice in most situations.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do...

Explanation:

The correct answer is option 'A': "If I were you, I would not do that." This is the grammatically correct form of the conditional sentence.

Here's a breakdown of the sentence and the reasons why option 'A' is correct:

Conditional Sentence:
In this sentence, we have a conditional clause ("If I were you") followed by the main clause ("I would not do that").

Conditional Clause:
The conditional clause expresses a hypothetical or unreal situation. In this case, it implies that the speaker is imagining themselves in the other person's position.

Subjunctive Mood:
The use of "were" instead of "was" in the conditional clause is an example of the subjunctive mood. The subjunctive mood is used to express hypothetical or contrary-to-fact situations. In English, the subjunctive form of the verb "to be" is "were" for all persons. Therefore, "If I were you" is the correct form.

Main Clause:
The main clause states the consequence or action that would occur in the hypothetical situation. In this case, the speaker is expressing their opinion or advice on what they would do in the other person's position - they would not do that particular action.

Options B, C, and D:
Options B, C, and D present variations of the sentence, but they are grammatically incorrect or do not convey the intended meaning.

- Option B: "If I were you, then I would not have done that." This uses the past perfect tense ("would not have done") in the main clause, which suggests that the action has already taken place. However, the conditional clause ("If I were you") implies a hypothetical or unreal situation, so the past perfect tense is not appropriate.

- Option C: "If I was you, then I would not do that." This uses the past tense ("was") in the conditional clause, which is incorrect. As mentioned earlier, the subjunctive form of the verb "to be" is "were" for all persons in hypothetical situations.

- Option D: "If I had been you, I would not have done that." This uses the past perfect tense ("had been") in the conditional clause, which suggests that the action has already taken place. Similar to option B, this does not align with the hypothetical nature of the conditional clause.

Therefore, option 'A' is the correct choice as it uses the subjunctive mood correctly and conveys the intended meaning of the sentence.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others views familiar to his hearers. The oratorys immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they made the worse appear the better cause, and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigants while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.If the author of the passage travelled to a political convention and saw various candidates speak he would most likely have the highest regard for an orator who

View answer

Of course, in his attempts at field investigation, the historian is at the disadvantage that the countryside has changed in many respects since the period which he is studying. He is not permitted to use H.G. Wellss time machine, to enable him to see it as it actually was. Inevitably he is concerned in the main, if not exclusively, with literary and other materials, which have survived from that stretch of the past which interests him.Old maps may be plans of cities, charts of sea coasts and estuaries, cartularies of landed estates, or topographic delineations of land areas. These clearly engage the interest of historians and geographers alike, and they call for a combination of the methods and viewpoints of each. Maps can be conceived of and considered in several quite different ways, being properly regarded, and so assessed, as works of artat best as objects of colour, skill, form, and beauty. They may alternatively be regarded purely for their cartographic aesthetic. The main queries which then arise are the following: how is it that the map-maker has carried out his task and with skill of what echelon and with what degree of success has he done so? Such an inquiry falls to the specialist field of historical cartography. An antiquarian map may also be approached in a means akin to that of the student who conceives it as a font contemporaneous with the time of its production. Thus, the historical cartographer may seek to bring grist to his mill and to consider the maps reliability as a satisfactory source of empirical evidence. By such means also the regional historian, in his search for essentials about such past matters as the availability of roads, the extent of enclosed farmland, or the number and location of mines and quarries, is no less an interested party.The value of old maps as documents useful for historicity depends necessarily on to what degree they depict and on how accurately. For virtually all periods of pre-modern history some maps have survived to serve as historiography, depicting, however imperfectly, certain features of past geography. The work of Claudius Ptolemywho lived in the 2nd century A.D.for centuries provided the basis for maps of the known world and its major regions. Although many were drawn on the scientific basis which he provided, they nevertheless embodied many errorsof location, distance, and the shape of areas of land and sea. The medieval portolan charts of the Mediterranean Sea and the later charts which provided sailing directions, produced in Holland, were accurate enough to be useful in practical navigation. Plans of important cities of Europe, so well-drawn as to yield evidence of their earlier form and extent, are notably offered in Braun and Hogenbergs Civitates Orbis Terrarum, published at Cologne and, in England, in John Speeds plans of cities. Similarly, John Ogilbys Britannia, Volume the First, appearing in 1675, gives detailed information of Englands road system as it existed nearly three centuries ago. However, few of the early maps approach modern standards, which require accurate representation of distances and of heights above mean sea-level and the use of carefullydistinguished symbols. This is because it was not until the 18th century that cartography, as an exact science, was born. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.With which of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

View answer

In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others views familiar to his hearers. The oratorys immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they made the worse appear the better cause, and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigants while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Implicit in the statement that the exaltation of virtuosity was not due mainly to Isocrates because public display was normal in a world that talked far more than it read is the assumption that

View answer

In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others views familiar to his hearers. The oratorys immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they made the worse appear the better cause, and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigants while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Historians agree that those seeking public office in modern America make far fewer speeches in the course of their campaign than those seeking a public position in ancient Greece did. The author would most likely explain this by pointing out that

View answer

As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a companys aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the companys practice organize a highly effective boycott of the companys products, their moral views will soon enter into the companys deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials. Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability? The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes. In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly.If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.A claim that things have ethical value to corporations only insofar as they are instrumental in furthering the ultimate goals of the corporation is

View answer

If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for Verbal 2024 is part of Verbal preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Verbal exam syllabus. Information about If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Verbal 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Verbal. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Verbal Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice If I was you, then I would not do that.a)If I were you, I would not do that.b)If I were you, then I would not have done that.c)If I was you, then I would not do that.d)If I had been you, I would not have done that.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.

Explore Courses for Verbal exam