 While in the case of (i) above, using the key was necessary for opening the door, no parallel claim seems to work for (ii): in the natural reading of this statement, my screaming is not a condition for your touching me. James McCawley claims that the “if”-clause in a standard English statement gives the condition—whether epistemic, temporal or causal—for the truth of the “then”-clause. The natural interpretation of (ii) is that my screaming depends on your touching me. To take my screaming as a necessary condition for your touching me seems to get the dependencies back to front. A similar concern arises if it is maintained that (ii) entails that you will touch me only if I scream.