Enigma wrote:The conditional is backshifted due to the past tense verb outside the clause. It is still 1st conditional, and 'got' is still an indicative verb.
'got' expresses a future time in the past.
Yes, I think this is the best explanation. And if we are using the verb 'be', we should in this case say was
rather than were
. This gives us the following useful distinction:
I said that if I was successful, I would have a celebration.
[Backshifted 1st conditional - likely/possible condition referring to future-in-the-past.]
I said that if I were successful, I would be rich.
[Backshifted 2nd conditional - unlikely/impossible condition referring to present-in-the-past.]
I said that if I were to be successful, it would be a miracle.
[Backshifted 2nd conditional - unlikely/impossible condition referring to future-in-the-past.]
One further question. If we "de-embed" the conditional, should we still apply the same rules to it? I think we should. For example, I think both of the following are OK:
I was glad I had left early. If I got lost, I would have extra time.
I was glad I had left early. If I was
[subsequently] lost, I would have extra time.