Must have PP

Question

Hello, Members and Gurus!!a. John would have finished the job if had had had enough time.b. John must have finished the job if had had had enough time.Can we say b. to mean a.?

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

No.

a. John would have finished the job if he had had enough time.-- He didn't finish
b. John must have finished the job if he had had enough time. - I think he might have finished

AlpheccaStars · Answer

a. John would have finished the job if ~~had~~ he had had enough time.
b. John must have finished the job if he had ~~had~~ had enough time.
Can we say b. to mean a.?

I would not. The pattern in the conditional sentences is "could have," "would have" and sometimes "should have." These indicate a possible outcome had the condition been true.

Here is a good pattern with "must" or "ought to". Here you are guessing what might be true, when you don't know for sure.
John must have finished the job by now; he has had enough time.

Pructus · Answer

Thanks a lot, Mister Micawber!!

Some people seem to say that if "must have" is stressed in actual speaking, b. can be used in the similar meaning with a.

The example sentence is not exactly same...

So, there may be some discrepancies...

Somehow, if stressed or in some way, "must have PP" can be used to mean similar meaning with "would have PP"?

Pructus · Answer

Thanks a lot for the input, AlpheccaStars!!

And before your reponse, I added some more....

CalifJim · Answer

pructus-
a. John would have finished the job if ~~had~~ he had had enough time.
b. John must have finished the job if ~~had~~ he had had enough time.
Can we say b. to mean a.?

No. You're confusing different parts of a formula of logic.

If John had had enough time, he would have finished the job.
John had enough time.
Therefore,
John must have finished the job. (It must be true that John finished the job.)

The must have part is the conclusion of the argument. You can't mix it with one of the premisses of the argument.

CJ

Pructus · Answer

Thanks a lot, CJ!!

All the explanations posted are well heard....
And I need to make sure for my part, which I cannot do that as a non-native of English ...

How about this?
I wrote some passage myself.
Still, is it impossible?

There was a military operation. The possible target was two, Target 1 and Target 2.
Everybody thinks that striking Target 1 was a better option. But the general in charge chose on the Target 2. So people are blaming the general for the wrong decision.

But those supporting the general assert that the general would have struck the Target 1, if the situation permitted, saying “The general is not stupid. He must have struck the Target 1 if he was able to do that. But the situation was not favorable, so he had to go plan B, knowingly taking some risk, which was targeting the Target 2. Now he is saying that he had no choice, and we should belive the general at the situation”.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

There was a military operation. The possible targets were ~~was~~ ~~two~~, Target 1 and Target 2.
Everybody thought ~~thinks~~ that striking Target 1 was the a better option. But the general in charge chose ~~on the~~ Target 2. So people are blaming the general for the wrong decision.

But those supporting the general assert that the general would have struck the Target 1, (no comma) if the situation permitted, saying “The general is not stupid. He (no, must does not work here. You can use would, might, or could) ~~must~~ have struck the Target 1 if he were ~~was~~ able to do that.(He was not able to. This describes an impossible situation in the past.) But the situation was not favorable, so he had to go with plan B, knowingly taking some risk, which was targeting ~~the~~ Target 2. Now he is saying that he had no choice, and we should believe the general at in this situation”.

Pructus · Answer

Oh, Thank You so much, AlpheccaStars!!
Your comments on my composition are really helping to me!!

Must have PP

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions