0
Sb70012 Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Badly written conditionals
Hi,
Once a native English speaker told me these conditional sentences don't make much sense:
1- " If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us more easily."
2- " If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily."
Would you please explain them to me?
I want you to tell me that why they don't make a very good sense.
This is my paraphrase:
1- " If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us more easily."
My paraphrase: "He didn't play in the game and if he did (played) he would beat us"
2- " If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily."
My paraphrase: "He didn't play in the game if he did (played) he wouldn't beat us"
Why do they make sense to me but not to you?
I think I analyzed their meanings or what they say.
Would you please be nice enough to clarify them to me that in which part I haven't understood it very well?
Or in which part I have not paraphrased them correctly?
Thank you.
Once a native English speaker told me these conditional sentences don't make much sense:
1- " If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us more easily."
2- " If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily."
Would you please explain them to me?
I want you to tell me that why they don't make a very good sense.
This is my paraphrase:
1- " If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us more easily."
My paraphrase: "He didn't play in the game and if he did (played) he would beat us"
2- " If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily."
My paraphrase: "He didn't play in the game if he did (played) he wouldn't beat us"
Why do they make sense to me but not to you?
I think I analyzed their meanings or what they say.
Would you please be nice enough to clarify them to me that in which part I haven't understood it very well?
Or in which part I have not paraphrased them correctly?
Thank you.
Top answer
Supposing that "he" refers to the same person, sentence 1 sounds strange because you say he didn't play in the game although you also say he beat you in the game, although not easily. "He could have beaten us more easily" obviously means that he did play in the game. " If you just say, "If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us," now that is a perfect sentence.
- Supposing that "he" refers to the same person, sentence 1 sounds strange because you say he didn't play in the game although you also say he beat you in the game, although not easily.
- "He could have beaten us more easily" obviously means that he did play in the game.
- " If you just say, "If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us," now that is a perfect sentence.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Supposing that "he" refers to the same person, sentence 1 sounds strange because you say he didn't play in the game although you also say he beat you in the game, although not easily. "He could have beaten us more easily" obviously means that he did play in the game.
The problem with the first example is "more easily." If you just say, "If he had played in the game, he could have beate
The problem with the first example is "more easily." If you just say, "If he had played in the game, he could have beate
00
If he had played in the game, he could have beaten us more easily. -- He did not play in the game, yet he beat us easily. It would have been even easier for him to beat us if he actually had.
If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily. -- He did not play in the game -- but if he had, it wouldn't have been any easier for him to beat us.
Those sen
If he had played in the game, he couldn't have beaten us more easily. -- He did not play in the game -- but if he had, it wouldn't have been any easier for him to beat us.
Those sen
00
The problem with the original wording is that it seems to mean "... more easily than if he hadn't played". This makes no sense because if someone doesn't play then there is no possibility of them either beating us or not beating us -- the question is inapplicable. There is also the issue that "didn't play in the game" and "us" seem to be talking about a team game, which is not really compatible wi
00
sb70012I want you to tell me that why they don't make a very good sense.1- " If he had played in the game, his team could have beaten us more easily."
He did not play. He is the best player on his team. Our team lost. We might have lost by more points if he had played.
2- " If he had played in the game, his team couldn't have
0
Related Questions