Saadat,
Here is my feedback for the 1st part of your question.

Most sources I've encountered woudl call only the 2nd example as being the 3rd conditional because only it has the classic structure: an "if' subordinate clause using past perfect + a main clause using 'would' (or a similar modal) &  the present perfect.  The 1st sentence does not contain the present perfect 'have' in its main clause, so most sources would not technically classify it as the 3rd conditional.  

 If she had helped, he would be a different person
  If she had helped, he would have been a different person.

I think the 1st sentence is what some people call a 'mixed conditiona'.  It is mixing the 3rd conditional (the 'if' + past perfect clause) with the 2nd conditional (a main clause having 'would' + the infinitive form of a verb).

In terms of meaning, the 2nd sentence is speculating about a past, unreal event, and the focus is clearly on the past.  However, the 1st example (the mixed conditional) is dealing with the present results of the past, unreal event.

In other words, I would use the 1st sentence if I wanted to talk about the present-day results of an imaginary act in the past, but I would use the 2nd example if I only wanted to talk about the past results of the act (for instance, if the 'he' in the sentence were now dead, I couldn't really use the 1st sentence).

larry





-------------------------------
Larry Beason
Director of Composition
Dept. of English, Univ. of South Alabama
Mobile, AL 36688
334-460-7861
-------------------------------

>>> "saadat.mond" <[log in to unmask]> - 5/14/01 12:47 AM >>>
Hi List.

I have a few questions that boggle my mind and so far I have not been able
to find a satisfactory answer. I hope someone out there would definitely be
able to provide some sort of clarification or at least identify a source
where I can find the explanation. What is the difference between the
following pairs of sentences?

a)    If she had helped, he would be a different person
      If she had helped, he would have been a different person.

In my understanding the sentence is grammatical mistake or perhaps a
substandard use. Now look at the following pair

b)    She is going to wear that dress for the party.
      She is going to be wearing that dress for the party.


Thanks in advance.

Regards
Saadat Mond
Official: Yes

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/