0
Listenever Posted 11 years ago
Grammar
could have + past participle
In a TED talk "https://www.ted.com/talks/kelly_mcgonigal_how_to_make_stress_your_friend/transcript?language=en", the speaker starts out like this:
00:11
I have a confession to make. But first, I want you to make a little confession to me. In the past year, I want you to just raise your hand if you've experienced relatively little stress. Anyone?
00:31
How about a moderate amount of stress?
00:34
Who has experienced a lot of stress? Yeah. Me too.
Then, later on, she talks about those among the audience who raised their hands to say that they've experienced a lot of stress in the past year. (Before this, she basically talks about "how to make stress your friend")
06:52
So my goal as a health psychologist has changed. I no longer want to get rid of your stress. I want to make you better at stress. And we just did a little intervention. If you raised your hand and said you'd had a lot of stress in the last year, we could have saved your life, because hopefully the next time your heart is pounding from stress, you're going to remember this talk and you're going to think to yourself, this is my body helping me rise to this challenge. And when you view stress in that way, your body believes you, and your stress response becomes healthier.
I'd like to know the contextual meaning of the boldfaced portion.
00:11
I have a confession to make. But first, I want you to make a little confession to me. In the past year, I want you to just raise your hand if you've experienced relatively little stress. Anyone?
00:31
How about a moderate amount of stress?
00:34
Who has experienced a lot of stress? Yeah. Me too.
Then, later on, she talks about those among the audience who raised their hands to say that they've experienced a lot of stress in the past year. (Before this, she basically talks about "how to make stress your friend")
06:52
So my goal as a health psychologist has changed. I no longer want to get rid of your stress. I want to make you better at stress. And we just did a little intervention. If you raised your hand and said you'd had a lot of stress in the last year, we could have saved your life, because hopefully the next time your heart is pounding from stress, you're going to remember this talk and you're going to think to yourself, this is my body helping me rise to this challenge. And when you view stress in that way, your body believes you, and your stress response becomes healthier.
I'd like to know the contextual meaning of the boldfaced portion.
Top answer
The meaning is something like : "it is possible that we will have saved your life (with the material you will listen to now)" Kind regards, Michael
- The meaning is something like : "it is possible that we will have saved your life (with the material you will listen to now)" Kind regards, Michael
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
25 Answers
0
The meaning is something like : "it is possible that we will have saved your life (with the material you will listen to now)"
Kind regards, Michael
Kind regards, Michael
00
listeneverIf you raised your hand and said you'd had a lot of stress in the last year, we could have saved your life, because hopefully the next time your heart is pounding from stress, you're going to remember this talk and you're going to think to yourself, this is my body helping me rise to this challenge.As is common when speaking "on the fly", thi
00
Michael Chambers Teaching EnglishThe meaning is something like : "it is possible that we will have saved your life (with the material you will listen to now)"Kind regards, MichaelThanks, Michael.
So the time of saving your life is definitely the future, i.e., after the time of speaking, right?
If so, is 'could have saved' used as a future perfect, jus
00
CalifJimThe primary reference, as always, is the present. But within the present you have two modalities: the present as it is and the present as envisioned.The speaker starts by imagining himself in an envisioned world in the present: If you raised your hand and saidUsing that as the anchor, he imagines something (anterior) previous to that anchor point: you had had a lo
00
On reflection and after reading Calif Jim's excellent post, my answer may not have been that helpful. His explanation of shifting time references is in my view worth understanding well because it will help you to make sense of complex sentences like this.
I think in fact the speaker means that - "perhaps we have saved your life" or in other words "we may have saved your life". The life
I think in fact the speaker means that - "perhaps we have saved your life" or in other words "we may have saved your life". The life
00
listeneverSo, I guess that the past tense ("raised") in the "if"-clause represents "a real world in the past" (some 6 minutes earlier in the talk). But since you mentioned "an envisioned world", you kind of lost me there.Ah, yes. I can see why I lost you there. I neglected to take that previous material into account.
CJ
00
Michael Chambers Teaching EnglishOn reflection and after reading Calif Jim's excellent post, my answer may not have been that helpful. His explanation of shifting time references is in my view worth understanding well because it will help you to make sense of complex sentences like this.But CalifJim admits that his first post is written out of context, and th
00
CalifJimAh, yes. I can see why I lost you there. I neglected to take that previous material into account.Thanks, CalifJim. So after considering the entire context, when do you think the "time-anchor" of "could have saved" is? Is it at the time of speaking or some time in the future?
00
Yes - I reread CalifJim's post and I think he initially got the sense wrong.
Often, you can use "could have +pp" to mean something was possible in the past but is no longer so.
The sense of "could have + pp" here is a different one : it is possible that, actually, we have saved your life. "may have + pp" works too in this sense (but not my first one).
I'm still happy w
Often, you can use "could have +pp" to mean something was possible in the past but is no longer so.
The sense of "could have + pp" here is a different one : it is possible that, actually, we have saved your life. "may have + pp" works too in this sense (but not my first one).
I'm still happy w
00
listenever So after considering the entire context, when do you think the "time-anchor" of "could have saved" is? Is it at the time of speaking or some time in the future?The basic concept of my answer remains the same. The speaker's mind is wandering a bit, and he's not thinking consistently in terms of time frames. "could have saved" is still a counterfac
0
Related Questions