Denoting Past possibility : "Could be" or "could have been"

Question

Dear Friends,I had known that past possibility can be denoted by either "migh have been" or "could have been" until I read in A Student's Grammar of the English Language (By Sidney Greenbaum and Randolph Quirk) that "Could be" can also be used to denote the same.For example:In those days, transatlantic voyage could be dengerous(=possibility)I think it should have been:In those days, transatlantic voyage could/might have been dengerous.I am not sure how one can denote past possiblity with  using "could be"  instead of "could have been"The same account has been found in the writers' "A comprehensive grammar of the English Language"As two formidable names are associated with these accounts, this doubt is really nagging me.Could anyone please help me in this regard.Best Regards,Sabya

Marius Hancu · Accepted Answer

They are right:

In those days, transatlantic voyage could be dangerous.
makes sense for the past.

In those days, transatlantic voyage could/might have been dangerous if attempted.
makes sense only the the attempt is under doubt, thus with an explicit if or similar

CalifJim · Answer

In those days, transatlantic voyage could be dangerous.

Yes. There really was the potential for danger when making such trips in those days. This is the correct way to say it.

I think it should have been: ...could/might have been....

No. Don't change it. If you say that transatlantic voyage could have been dangerous (or might have been dangerous), you're saying that you're not sure. You're saying that maybe there was danger and maybe there wasn't. This is still possibility, but a different kind of possibility than indicated in the first example.

In the first example there is a true likelihood of danger. There could be danger at that time. In that sense, "Danger was certainly possible then." (This usage almost requires an adverbial expression indicating past time.)
In the second example you don't know if there was danger or not. There could have been danger at that time. In that sense, "Maybe danger was possible then."

Compare:

During the Middle Ages people could be accused of the "crime" of witchcraft. (It certainly was a possibility. It often happened.)
Historians don't know what happened to the medieval philosopher Jankovitius. For all they know, he could have been accused of witchcraft and sent to prison. (Maybe he was accused and imprisoned; maybe not. It was possible, but nobody knows.)

CJ

BarbaraPA · Answer

Just as a "by the way," "transatlantic voyage" requires an article.

CalifJim · Answer

Ah, yes. So true. My brain just automatically changed it to transatlantic travel since it was concentrating on other matters at the time!

CJ

BarbaraPA · Answer

I do that all the time.

Akavall · Answer

Very insightful thread. Thank You.

Sabyakgp · Answer

Marius Hancu , CalifJim , Grammar Geek and Akavall .

Thank you very much for your help.

Best Regards,
Sabya

Sabyakgp · Answer

Grammar Geek,

You are right, voyage is a countable noun so requires a determiner. Also, I am sorry for the typo "dengerous".

Best Regards,
Sabya

Anonymous · Answer

The best answer really. Thank you dude for that explicit explanation.

CalifJim · Answer

Sabyakgppast possibility can be denoted by either "might have (been)" or "could have (been)" ... [or "may have (been)"]
"Could (be)" [or "may (be)" or "might (be)"] can also be used to denote the same.

Though many years have passed since I first commented on this, I would like to clarify further.

These are two different varieties of "possibility", and they are not as similar as they may seem at first.

English has a different paradigm for these two varieties.

Logical possibility. Present: could / Past: could have

Logical possibility is "maybe" possibility. It's the possibility of uncertainty, of not knowing.

The plan could fail. ~ The plan [may / might] fail. ~ [Maybe / It is (logically) possible that] the plan will fail. We are not certain. We don't know.
The plan could have failed. ~ The plan [may have / might have] failed. ~ [Maybe / It was (logically) possible that] the plan would fail. We are not certain. We don't know.

Circumstantial possibility. Present: can / Past: could

Circumstantial possibility is the certain potential (opportunity, chance) that an event will occur. There is nothing uncertain about it. There is no "maybe" about it. In the past it is somewhat like "used to be able to". Past circumstantial could may have to be accompanied by adverbial expressions to place it in the past and thus disambiguate it from present logical could.

You can buy that kind of hose at any hardware store. The opportunity exists, and we know that it does.
Five years ago you could buy that kind of hose at any hardware store. (The opportunity existed, and we know that it did.)
_________

It is obvious from the discussion above that the form 'could' can be ambiguous.

CJ

Denoting Past possibility : "Could be" or "could have been"

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions