"If we were not able to" vs "If we were not able to create"

Question

"If we were not able to" vs "If we were not able to create"

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in different contexts. "If we were not able to" is a more general statement that can be followed by any action or outcome. On the other hand, "if we were not able to create" is more specific and implies that the action being referred to is related to creation or production.

Last Updated: March 25, 2024

This phrase is a conditional statement that expresses a hypothetical situation where the ability to do something is lacking.

Examples:

If we were not able to finish the project on time, we would have to ask for an extension.
If we were not able to attend the meeting, we could join via video conference.
If we were not able to find a solution, we might have to seek help from an expert.

Alternatives:

if we could not
if we were unable to
if we did not have the ability to
if we lacked the capacity to
if we were incapable of

This phrase is a conditional statement that specifically refers to the inability to create or produce something.

Examples:

If we were not able to create a new design, we would have to use the existing one.
If we were not able to create a backup, we might lose all our data.
If we were not able to create a plan, the project would be at risk.

Alternatives:

if we could not create
if we were unable to produce
if we did not have the ability to make
if we lacked the capacity to generate
if we were incapable of forming

Answer 1

If we were not able to

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

If we were not able to create

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

"If we were not able to" vs "If we were not able to create"

If we were not able to

If we were not able to create

Related Comparisons