0
Park sang joon Posted 12 years ago
Grammar
The conditional expressions with the perfect infinitive
We occasionally use a subject or a to-infinitive in place of the 'if' clause to express an unreal situation.
See the below sentences; we can suppose the sentences express unreal situations with the phrase 'would have',
but we should select either a subject or a to-infinitive phrase as a substitute which execute the role of a conditional clause.
1) A secretary would have been foolish to do it.
2) A secretary would have been foolish to have done it.
Below is the my assumption.
I gave priority to the to-infinitive phrase to the subjects if only because I thought I have to do so without the reason.
1)-1) If a secretary had done it, she would have been foolish.
2)-1) If a secretary had had done it, she would have been foolish. <--- What is this??
For reference, I have excluded descriptive sentences so that we can induce various situations so there are a sentence a passage; No context.
I'd like to know your analyses of the two sentences '1), 2)'.
In advance, thank you for your help.
See the below sentences; we can suppose the sentences express unreal situations with the phrase 'would have',
but we should select either a subject or a to-infinitive phrase as a substitute which execute the role of a conditional clause.
1) A secretary would have been foolish to do it.
2) A secretary would have been foolish to have done it.
Below is the my assumption.
I gave priority to the to-infinitive phrase to the subjects if only because I thought I have to do so without the reason.
1)-1) If a secretary had done it, she would have been foolish.
2)-1) If a secretary had had done it, she would have been foolish. <--- What is this??
For reference, I have excluded descriptive sentences so that we can induce various situations so there are a sentence a passage; No context.
I'd like to know your analyses of the two sentences '1), 2)'.
In advance, thank you for your help.
Top answer
First group: 1) is correct. 2) is correct but the problem with it is that it is "too correct": it sounds too complex for normal speech or writing - there are too many "have's" in the sentence. " The first part of this sentence is nominally present tense, but the second part "pushes" it into the past tense by implication.
- First group: 1) is correct.
- 2) is correct but the problem with it is that it is "too correct": it sounds too complex for normal speech or writing - there are too many "have's" in the sentence.
- " The first part of this sentence is nominally present tense, but the second part "pushes" it into the past tense by implication.
- Second group: 1) is not right.
- The second part is incomplete.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
First group:
1) is correct.
2) is correct but the problem with it is that it is "too correct": it sounds too complex for normal speech or writing - there are too many "have's" in the sentence. You'd more likely hear: "A secretary would be foolish to have done it." The first part of this sentence is nominally present tense, but the second part "pushes" it into the past tense b
1) is correct.
2) is correct but the problem with it is that it is "too correct": it sounds too complex for normal speech or writing - there are too many "have's" in the sentence. You'd more likely hear: "A secretary would be foolish to have done it." The first part of this sentence is nominally present tense, but the second part "pushes" it into the past tense b
00
Thank you for your concrete answer.
I know 2)-1) is the nonsense, but I didn't know 1)-1) is ungrammatical.
Why need '1)-1)' the to-infinitive?
What would you interpret the 2) as?
I know 2)-1) is the nonsense, but I didn't know 1)-1) is ungrammatical.
Why need '1)-1)' the to-infinitive?
What would you interpret the 2) as?
00
what do I interpret this sentence "A secretary would be foolish to have done it." as?
00
"If a secretary had done it, she is would be foolish to." Is this correct?
00
1-1 is not right. The first part of the sentence specifies the doing of something. This specification is so strongly stated that it necessitates that the second part of the sentence relate to this. Therefore, in this situation you cannot simply say that the secretary was foolish; you need to say that she would have been foolish to do it: "If a secretary had done it, she would have been foolish
00
Thank you no name one for your concrete account^^
If you afford to, I'd like to check with you where my thought about the phrase 'would have' and the word 'would' is correct.
'would have'
1) to refer to things that actually not happened. (O)
2) to refer to things that actually happened. (O)
3) to refer to things that might have happened. (X)
'would'
1) to
If you afford to, I'd like to check with you where my thought about the phrase 'would have' and the word 'would' is correct.
'would have'
1) to refer to things that actually not happened. (O)
2) to refer to things that actually happened. (O)
3) to refer to things that might have happened. (X)
'would'
1) to
0
Related Questions