0
Anonymous Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
"Steve has left at five"
Hello
Why is "Steve has left at five" not good, but "Steve must have left at five" is?
Why is "Steve has left at five" not good, but "Steve must have left at five" is?
Top answer
Hello, Anon, In "Steve has left at five", you're using the present perfect with a complement (at 5) referring to a precise moment of the past, which is not correct. You want the simple past here: "S. left at 5".
- Hello, Anon, In "Steve has left at five", you're using the present perfect with a complement (at 5) referring to a precise moment of the past, which is not correct.
- You want the simple past here: "S.
- left at 5".
- You're saying now that it is probable, likely and most certainly true that he left at 5.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
Hello, Anon,
In "Steve has left at five", you're using the present perfect with a complement (at 5) referring to a precise moment of the past, which is not correct. You want the simple past here: "S. left at 5".
"Steve must have left at five" Here ithe action of leaving is set in the past (at 5), hence the past infinitive (have left).You're saying now that it is probable, likely
In "Steve has left at five", you're using the present perfect with a complement (at 5) referring to a precise moment of the past, which is not correct. You want the simple past here: "S. left at 5".
"Steve must have left at five" Here ithe action of leaving is set in the past (at 5), hence the past infinitive (have left).You're saying now that it is probable, likely
00
PieanneHello, Anon,
In "Steve has left at five", you're using the present perfect with a complement (at 5) referring to a precise moment of the past, which is not correct. You want the simple past here: "S. left at 5".
"Steve must have left at five" Here ithe action of leaving is set in the past (at 5), hence the past infinitive (have left).You're sayin
00
Yes, but in the second one you're not stating the action of leaving, you're giving your opinion (now) about the past fact .
00
PieanneYes, but in the second one you're not stating the action of leaving, you're giving your opinion (now) about the past fact .And how does that control the use or not of the adverb "at five"?
00
Precise times, like 'at five', cannot be used with the present perfect, but they can be used with all the modalities combined with "have". When a modal verb (can, could, may, might, must, etc.) is followed by "have", the proposition which follows is regarded as past.
He must like classical music to judge by his collection of CD's.
= It must now be the case that he likes
He must like classical music to judge by his collection of CD's.
= It must now be the case that he likes
00
CalifJimWhen a modal verb (can, could, may, might, must, etc.) is followed by "have", the proposition which follows is regarded as past.How about here?
CJ
I must have a walk in the park more often.
I must have Sandra over to dinner.
00
I think Calif meant "a past infinitive", which is formed with "have" + V in the past participle.
In your examples, it's a present infinitive, so the proposition that follows "must" cannot be regarded as past.
In your examples, it's a present infinitive, so the proposition that follows "must" cannot be regarded as past.
00
I meant "'have' followed by a past participle". (I assumed you knew that.) Therefore, 'have a walk' and 'have Sandra over' do not come into it.
CJ
CJ
00
CalifJimI meant "'have' followed by a past participle". (I assumed you knew that.)Why should I?
CJ
00
Why should I?No particular reason -- just that all the examples in the thread had past participles, I suppose.
In any case, the observations I made had to do with a modal verb followed by "have" followed by a past participle.
CJ
0
Related Questions