Why are conflicting verb tenses allowed in usage of なら


In <https://japanesetest4you.com/japanese-language-proficiency-test-
jlpt-n4-grammar-exercise-7/> I encountered the following sentence:

> 父は何でも作れたんだ。
>
> **戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれた。**

If I were to translate this into English, I'm guessing it would be

> Father could make anything.
>
> If I **need** a cupboard, father **would have made** it for me.

Notice I internally translated as **need** instead of **needed** because it
was 〜が必要なら and not 〜が必要だったなら.

Similarly, I internally translated as **would have made** because of the past
form in the phrase 作ってくれた.

Looking at my internal translation, however, I end up getting confused because
of the divergence of tenses. Surely, the sentence would have been better
translated as:

  * If I need a cupboard, father would make it for me.

or

  * If I needed a cupboard, father would have made one for me.

In other words, perhaps the sentence could have been:

> 戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれるだろう。

In essence, I'm perhaps not understanding how tenses are evaluated. So what
did the sentence actually mean? How am I supposed to interpret it correctly?




Your sentence simply means:

> 戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれた。  
>  When(ever) a cupboard was necessary, Father made it (for me/us).

However, if the context so far clearly indicates the cupboard never existed,
the following "counterfactual" or "subjunctive" interpretation is also
possible (のに can be used for clarity).

> 戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれた(のに)。  
>  If a cupboard is/was necessary, Father would have made it! (counterfactual)

Related: [How to express the subjunctive mood in
Japanese](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/64544/5010)

* * *

I think なら is a tense-less expression; it's interchangeable with 必要であるなら or
必要だったなら/必要であったなら depending on the subsequent context.

  * 今すぐ必要なら、持って行ってください。  
= 今すぐ必要であるなら、持っていってください。  
If you need it right now, take it.

  * 明日必要なら、言ってください。  
= 明日必要であるなら、言ってください。  
If you will need it tomorrow, tell me so.

  * その時必要なら、なぜそう言わなかったの？  
= その時必要だったなら、なぜそう言わなかったの？  
If you needed it at that time, why didn't you say so?

You can use なら with a noun, in which case なら is clearly tense-less:

  * iPhoneならできるようになります。  
It will be possible with an iPhone.

  * iPhoneならできます。  
It's possible with an iPhone.

  * iPhoneならできた。  
I was able to do it with an iPhone. / I managed to do it with an iPhone.
(factual)  
I could have done it with an iPhone. (counterfactual)




Your sentence simply means:

> 戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれた。  
>  When(ever) a cupboard was necessary, Father made it (for me/us).

However, if the context so far clearly indicates the cupboard never existed,
the following "counterfactual" or "subjunctive" interpretation is also
possible (のに can be used for clarity).

> 戸棚が必要なら、父が作ってくれた(のに)。  
>  If a cupboard is/was necessary, Father would have made it! (counterfactual)

Related: [How to express the subjunctive mood in
Japanese](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/64544/5010)

* * *

I think なら is a tense-less expression; it's interchangeable with 必要であるなら or
必要だったなら/必要であったなら depending on the subsequent context.

  * 今すぐ必要なら、持って行ってください。  
= 今すぐ必要であるなら、持っていってください。  
If you need it right now, take it.

  * 明日必要なら、言ってください。  
= 明日必要であるなら、言ってください。  
If you will need it tomorrow, tell me so.

  * その時必要なら、なぜそう言わなかったの？  
= その時必要だったなら、なぜそう言わなかったの？  
If you needed it at that time, why didn't you say so?

You can use なら with a noun, in which case なら is clearly tense-less:

  * iPhoneならできるようになります。  
It will be possible with an iPhone.

  * iPhoneならできます。  
It's possible with an iPhone.

  * iPhoneならできた。  
I was able to do it with an iPhone. / I managed to do it with an iPhone.
(factual)  
I could have done it with an iPhone. (counterfactual)

