When I was a child... (Past Simple throughout or Past Simple + would)

English as a Second Language English Vocabulary, Grammar and Idioms
1

Hello,

When I was a child, if you didn’t eat what was served for dinner you went to bed hungry.
When I was a child, if you had a sore throat you were treated with a mustard plaster.

When I was a child, if you didn’t eat what was served for dinner you would go to bed hungry.
When I was a child, if you had a sore throat you would be treated with a mustard plaster.

Are both sets of sentences fine? If yes, is there any difference between them at all?

Thank you!

2

Relying on:
bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learn … oint.shtml
and: learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/ … ast-simple,
I would say that you could also say “you used to go/used to be treated” as well.
My taking on it: the choice depends on what idea you want to pur forward: simply stating the routine when a child (simple past); stressing the idea of the repeated actions/‘nasty’ you were if you were repeatedly subjected to the treatment

3

Sorry. …stressing the idea of the repeated actions/how ‘nasty’ you were repeatedly turning down meals (‘would’).

4

Hi Cristina,

An interesting question because both the ‘conditional’ element and the ‘repeated’ element of ‘would’ tend to collide in the second sentence. And that makes it difficult to separate them. In this sentence - If I saved my money, I would buy a car - there is no doubt that the conditional element is paramount.

Back to your question. Both sentences are fine and I would say that the difference is that ‘went’ states the action as a factual result of and ‘would go’ indicates the likely consequence of didn’t eat.

5

Hi Alan and Eugene,

That is pretty much what I thought. Thank you very much for your explanations!