<blockquote>
<p>Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, It is like placing the object before the verb to emphasize the object, placing the antecedent after the consequent emphasize the consequent</p>
<ol>
<li><p>如果你不吃饭的话，你就(会)很饿。</p>
</li>
<li><p>你(会)很饿(的)，如果你不吃饭的话。</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>You cannot use 就(then) in the second sentence</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;你[就]会很饿的，如果你不吃饭的话。&quot;  (You would [then] very hungry if you don't eat dinner)</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>It is ungrammatical in Chinese or English</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Some may say the second sentence seems like English grammar, but modern Chinese does incorporate English grammar especially among translated literary works</p>
<p>Another example:</p>
<p>如果你跟他對打的话，你一定會被打死的</p>
<p>你一定會被打死的，如果你跟他對打的话 (stress the importance of the fact that  you will be beaten to dead)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-04T04:29:20.237Z
2021-11-04T04:29:20.237Z
Tang Ho
<p>There is no difference with the sentence modified as:</p>
<p>如果你不吃饭的话，你(一定)會感到饿。 = 你(一定)會感到饿，如果你不吃饭的话。</p>
<p>如果你不吃饭的话，你(絕對)會饿死的。 = 你(絕對)會饿死的，如果你不吃饭的话。</p>
<p>However, the sentence would be incorrect if we say - 你&quot;就會&quot;感到饿，如果你不吃饭的话。 As the modifier 就(then) of the consequence, 會(will), is heavily dependant upon the antecedent - the consequent sentence can't be a standalone sentence as the example sentences above.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-04T15:03:34.453Z
2021-11-04T15:45:42.920Z
2021-11-04T15:45:42.920Z
r13
<p>Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?</p>
<p>Antecedent before consequent</p>
<p>如果你不吃饭的话，你就很饿。<br />
Rúguǒ nǐ bù chīfàn dehuà, nǐ jiù hěn è. <br />
If you don't eat, you'll be hungry.</p>
<p>Is the following grammatical?</p>
<p>Consequent before antecedent</p>
<p>? 你就很饿，如果你不吃饭的话。<br />
? Nǐ jiù hěn è, rúguǒ nǐ bù chīfàn dehuà. <br />
? you'll be hungry if you don't eat.</p>
<p>If the second sentence is not grammatical, is there a different way to say it that is grammatical?</p>

<grammar><conjunction>
Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?
# Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-11-04)

Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?

Antecedent before consequent

如果你不吃饭的话，你就很饿。  
Rúguǒ nǐ bù chīfàn dehuà, nǐ jiù hěn è.   
If you don't eat, you'll be hungry.

Is the following grammatical?

Consequent before antecedent

? 你就很饿，如果你不吃饭的话。  
? Nǐ jiù hěn è, rúguǒ nǐ bù chīfàn dehuà.   
? you'll be hungry if you don't eat.

If the second sentence is not grammatical, is there a different way to say it that is grammatical?

**Tags:** grammar, conjunction


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2021-11-04. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

> Is it grammatical to place the antecedent after the consequent in a conditional sentence?

Yes, It is like placing the object before the verb to emphasize the object, placing the antecedent after the consequent emphasize the consequent

1. 如果你不吃饭的话，你就(会)很饿。
2. 你(会)很饿(的)，如果你不吃饭的话。

You cannot use 就(then) in the second sentence

> "你[就]会很饿的，如果你不吃饭的话。" (You would [then] very hungry if you don't eat dinner)

> It is ungrammatical in Chinese or English

Some may say the second sentence seems like English grammar, but modern Chinese does incorporate English grammar especially among translated literary works

Another example:

如果你跟他對打的话，你一定會被打死的

你一定會被打死的，如果你跟他對打的话 (stress the importance of the fact that you will be beaten to dead)


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-11-04. Score: 1

There is no difference with the sentence modified as:

如果你不吃饭的话，你(一定)會感到饿。 = 你(一定)會感到饿，如果你不吃饭的话。

如果你不吃饭的话，你(絕對)會饿死的。 = 你(絕對)會饿死的，如果你不吃饭的话。

However, the sentence would be incorrect if we say - 你"就會"感到饿，如果你不吃饭的话。 As the modifier 就(then) of the consequence, 會(will), is heavily dependant upon the antecedent - the consequent sentence can't be a standalone sentence as the example sentences above.


---

