I think I will never fully understand the differences amongst the different forms of conditional, which is very confusing.
This time I abandoned textbooks and read the definition in a Japanese dictionary. I found something that gave me to think. Before saying I understood...I want to hear from someone who knows about Japanese
(This is a very small part of it, the definitions are way much longer with different points).
ば
１）前に示す事態の成立が後に示す事態の実現のための 条件であることを示す。
順接の恒常条件：その条件のもとで常にある事柄が成立 する場合の条件を示す。
「春になれば雪が溶ける」
「あと彼さえ来れば、メンバーが揃う」
。。。
たら
３）未実現の事柄を仮定して、条件として示す。
「雨だったら中止にしよう」
「休んだら元気になった」
So if I well understood the difference there, is that in the subordinate (the one before ば・たら) is in the fact that when you have ば is a sure thing to happen, while with たら it is not a sure thing to happen, but more hypothetical. If I well understood it would be a mistake saying 春になったら雪が溶ける since it is a sure fact that spring will come. So in the second example of ば it is not an hypothetical thing "if he comes too", he is sure to arrive, it is just a matter of when.
In the same way it would be wrong to say 雨であれば中止しよう because we cannot be 100% sure that it is gonna rain. Unless maybe a weather forecast can be considered certainty and allows to use ば? And the second example with たら just says what would happen in case someone rests, but it not sure that person is actually gonna rest.
If I am right, then for a past action wouldn't make sense the ば because it is 100% hypothetical...it cannot be a sure thing since it already happened. For example やってみたら、簡単だった. It can't be sure the fact that it would have been easier had the person tried.
But this raises another question in my head...about the past.
勉強したら試験に受かる would this be "had you studied you would pass the exam" or "if you study you will pass the exam"
Sorry for the long question...but if I am right I got a big step towards understanding this part of grammar better.
お願いします