Should have/must have

Question

Which are correct:1-He has to have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.2-He must have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.3- He should have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.4-He has to have talked to John yesterday.5-He must have talked to John yesterday.I think "3" does not work. The first part is saying that that was what he should have done but did not.Gratefully,Navi.

Fivejedjon · Accepted Answer

navitasan1-He has to have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.2-He must have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.3- He should have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.4-He has to have talked to John yesterday.5-He must have talked to John yesterday.

They are all possible. Only context can tell us whether the speaker belives that the key was not left in #3

Daylighttt · Answer

Hi fivejedjon , what is the difference between these two sentences?

He has to have left his key under the door mat.
He had to leave his key under the door mat.

The first one doesn't make sense for me. It is really complicating in terms of the meaning. If an English teacher says that the first one is correct, I must certainly bear it in my mind:) but I need ask for a clarification.

KJinCali79 · Answer

navitasan1-He has to have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.
2-He must have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.
3- He should have left his key under the door mat. Take a look to see if it is there.

These are all correct, but slightly different meanings. For the sake of clarity there are three people involved in this statement. A - the person saying it. B - the person it is being said to. and C - the "he" the statement refers to.

1. The emphasis here is that person A believes that person C left the key under the mat and is telling person B to look for it there.
2. The emphasis here is that person A does not know that person C left the key under the mat, in fact, they may have looked for it somehere else before this statement was made, but person A is now suggesting that under the mat could be a logical place for person C to have put the key, and is telling person B to look for it there.
3. The emphasis here is that person A does not know where person C left the key, but person A thinks person C should have left it under the mat.

CalifJim · Answer

navitasan-
2-He must have left his key under the door mat. ...
5-He must have talked to John yesterday.

These are the neutral forms for showing a logical conclusion from the evidence at hand.

The only reasonable conclusion is that [ he left his key under the door mat / he talked to John yesterday ].

navitasan-
1-He has to have left his key under the door mat. ...
4-He has to have talked to John yesterday.

These are the less-used emphatic forms of the same idea.

navitasan3- He should have left his key under the door mat. ...

There are two interpretations.
a. He was supposed to leave it there, but he didn't. He failed to do what he was supposed to do.
b. It is expected that he would have left it there, so he probably did.

Only interpretation b works if the next sentence says "Take a look".

CJ

Daylighttt · Answer

Hi, KjinCali79. Your explanation for the first sentence is very enlightening, of which I didn't  think  in terms of that aspect. Thanks.

Should have/must have

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions