0
Anonymous Posted 10 years ago
Grammar
Difference between Was to and was to have+past participle
What is the difference in the meaning between following sentences:
> 1. John was to have picked strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
> 2. John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
(Source: modified example from BBC )
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv103.shtml)
I've read in Learn English BBC that the form "was to" and "was to have" is used for past plan which wasn't fullfiled.
But What I haven't understood is that these form look similar to me. I'm in a dillema which one (was to, or was to have) is used for past plan and which one is for unfullfilled past plan.
So, what is the differences between the construction was/were to ...* and *was/were to have + past participle?
I would appreciate for your helpfull answer
> 1. John was to have picked strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
> 2. John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
(Source: modified example from BBC )
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv103.shtml)
I've read in Learn English BBC that the form "was to" and "was to have" is used for past plan which wasn't fullfiled.
But What I haven't understood is that these form look similar to me. I'm in a dillema which one (was to, or was to have) is used for past plan and which one is for unfullfilled past plan.
So, what is the differences between the construction was/were to ...* and *was/were to have + past participle?
I would appreciate for your helpfull answer
Top answer
Anonymous What is the difference in the meaning between following sentences:> 1. > 2. John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
- Anonymous What is the difference in the meaning between following sentences:> 1.
- > 2.
- John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
- I find (1) more satisfactory.
- I see "was to have picked" as being more from the viewpoint of now, and "was to pick" as more from the viewpoint of the time in the past when this was the plan or schedule.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
AnonymousWhat is the difference in the meaning between following sentences:> 1. John was to have picked strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.> 2. John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.I find (1) more satisfactory. I see "was to have picked" as being more from the viewpoint of now, a
00
Anonymousdifference in the meaningThe meaning is the same. Only the temporal viewpoint (see GPY's post) is a bit different. I'd use 1, especially in writing, but I wouldn't object to 2 either.
CJ
0
Related Questions