Which of these two statements is grammatically correct?

I believe the second one is correct if you wish to state continuous love although I don't remember the grammatical rule...

Edit: I'm right, I just found the following:

1. Hypothetical events or states are unlikely but possible in the present or future.

Imaginative conditional sentences expressing hypothetical events or states have a past tense verb in the if-clause and would + verb (or might or could + verb) in the result clause.

Examples of hypothetical conditional sentences (present and/or future time):

If George had enough money, he would buy a new car.

If I won the lottery, I would buy you a present.

If she knew the answer, she would tell us.

(George probably does not have enough money; I probably will not win the lottery; she probably does not know the answer.)

2. Contrary-to-fact events or states are either impossible in the present time or did not happen in the past.

Imaginative conditional sentences expressing present contrary-to-fact events or states have a past verb in the if-clause and would + verb (or might or could + verb) in the result clause. Some examples:

If I were you, I would not do that.

If she studied for exams, she would get better grades.

If it were raining, the streets would be wet.

(I am not you; she doesn’t study for exams; it isn’t raining.)

Imaginative conditional sentences expressing past contrary-to-fact events or states have a past perfect verb in the if-clause and would + have + verb (or might or could + have + verb) in the result clause. Some examples:

If George had had enough money, he would have bought a new car.

If I had won the lottery, I would have bought you a present.

If she had known the answer, she would have told us.

(George did not have enough money; I did not win the lottery; she did not know the answer.)

They are both grammatically correct. Generally, the tenses should be consistent throughout the text. Eg all past all or present. In this case, the act of 'loving me' is timeless, so you could use either sentence.

It uses subjunctive mood.

"The subjunctive mood is used in dependent clauses that do the following: 1) express a wish; 2) begin with if and express a condition that does not exist (is contrary to fact); 3) begin with as if and as though when such clauses describe a speculation or condition contrary to fact; and 4) begin with that and express a demand, requirement, request, or suggestion.

She wishes her boyfriend were here.

If Juan were more aggressive, he'd be a better hockey player.

We would have passed if we had studied harder.

He acted as if he were guilty.

I requested that he be present at the hearing."

I depends on how you look at the two sentences. The first one has loved, being in the past-tense, meaning that he/she did love you once. The second sentence tells you that he/she loves you in the present-tense. So however you look at it they both are correct in the grammatical sense. It just depends on which sentence applies to you, then you use that sentence as a basis. Hope that helps:)

One refers to past tense loved ,love is present tense so both would be correct in the correct context of the situation.

Loved "sounds" better, but then again, the way we talk typically isn't grammatically correct. I believe you would be find using either statements. It was a good idea, that you typed them into Word. I see why it is confusing deciding which seems correct.

I would tend to think that the second sentence makes more sense. The first sentence uses the verb "love" in the past tense. Why would someone be holding you tightly in the present will professing their love for you in the past tense? If the person loved you in the past why would they be holding you tightly now?

Both are grammatically correct, of course.

The first one, is the person speaking in the present tense. That they love you currently.

The second, is past tense, telling you that they loved you in the past.

What you need to figure out, is which one is correct in context, not grammar. :)

They may both be correct, but i think that "loved" sounds better.

Goodness...i had to read that over and over like 15 times before i realized that it was love and loved...but yeah, loved

each and every thing different than the order wherein those that could neither be created nor be destroyed exist can in no way get replaced. No. the main suitable grammar i think of is each and every thing different than the order wherein those can neither be created nor be destroyed exist can in no way get replaced. i only bumped off the 2d "which" coz you used 2 which(es) ] you have different blunders there

Second.