0
Navidre Posted 13 years ago
Grammar

could have

these animal could run very fast, reaching speeds up to 45 km/h. it could have easily used its locomotive power to move to warmer climates during harsh winters.

This is a part of an article.
all of the reading is just a hypothesis.
what is the role of 'could have' here ?
from the context it could be understand that it is not a unreal situation.
so is it talking about their abilities ?! or talking about possibility ?
  

Top answer

i think there is a subtle difference between past unreal and past hypothesis about an ability or a possibility and it can be understood from the context. in general could have is a hypothesis about an ability but context ( such as in condition ) can make it unreal situation. so the difference between "could" and "could have" would be certainty.

— Navidre

  • i think there is a subtle difference between past unreal and past hypothesis about an ability or a possibility and it can be understood from the context.
  • in general could have is a hypothesis about an ability but context ( such as in condition ) can make it unreal situation.
  • so the difference between "could" and "could have" would be certainty.
  • "could" is assure about some ability but "could have" is not sure about it.
  • am i right ?
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

1 Answers
0
i think there is a subtle difference between past unreal and past hypothesis about an ability or a possibility and it can be understood from the context.
in general could have is a hypothesis about an ability but context ( such as in condition ) can make it unreal situation.
so the difference between "could" and "could have" would be certainty. "could" is assure about some ability but "cou
0

Related Questions