usage of unreal hypothetical when speaking of something unlikely to happen

Question

Is this correct?

When a student asked if he was “a dictator like Hitler,” Patterson asked, “If I was Hitler, does that mean I put you in an oven?”

Isn’t that supposed to be “if I were” there?

Answer 1

Absolutely not. This is a real case, not an unreal case. Everything is in the real past, never some conditional or subjunctive.

Your name suggests that you may know Spanish, a language which uses the imperfect subjunctive for the unreal past. What you have to understand is that this is not a “si fuera / si fuese” case, but simply a “si fue” one, to speak in terms that a native Spanish speaker would understand. This is because that just like in English, in Spanish you can have well-formed sentences that use the real past all around.

For example:

Entiendo que sí. Y si fui a Londres fue, no lo dudes, porque pensé que ella estaba allí.

     ‭ ― El hombre que no fui: Una trepidante y esclarecedora novela sobre el caso Urquijo, Javier Menéndez Flores y Melchor Miralles, 2017.

That uses the real past completely, as does its translation into English:

That’s my understanding. And if I did go to London, have no doubt, it was because I thought she was there.

Just as learners of Spanish are not initially taught about cases of the “real past” like this one, neither are learners of English. But clearly these cases do occur, and not only that, the causes that give rise to them in the two languages are the same situations in both.

Answer 2

The OP's question: “If I was Hitler, does that mean I put you in an oven?”

If I were/was are both correct, but watch happens if we generate other examples using a simple past with the same pattern of tenses:

• If I was/were Madonna, does that mean I sang all the time?

• If I were/was a boor, does that mean I insulted you?

For me, the sentences above are not grammatical.

However, the ones below are:

- If I were/was Madonna, would that mean that I sang all the time?

- If I were/was Hitler, would that mean I put [simple past] you in an oven?

Also grammatical is: If I were/was Hitler, does that mean I would put you in an oven. But this last one has a different meaning.

In Spanish: Si fuera Hitler ¿ esto quiere decir que te puse en un horno?

That sentence is wrong in Spanish but is an accurate translation of the incorrect sentence in English.

It would have to be:

Si fuera Hitler ¿ esto querría decir que te puse en un horno?

Better would be: Si fuera Hitler ¿ esto querría decir que te pondría en un horno?

In English, If + were/was is basically the same thing. "If I was" is considered acceptable grammar for "If I were". Some people prefer the former and others prefer the latter. Neither of these forms when translated can be anything other than subjunctive (in Spanish and Portuguese) and in French, one would use the imperfect:

Si j'étais Hitler, est-ce que cela veut dire que je te mettrais au four?