0
Johnson13 Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
the writer has the ability to use 1000 words to talk about what could have been finished in 100 words
A sentence: the writer has the ability to use 1000 words to talk about what could have been finished in 100 words.
Do you think it is grammatical and makes sense? I have this question because the tenses are not consistent: HAS is present, while COULD HAVE BEEN is the past of COULD BE, ad COULD BE should be used here. But I'm not sure; could anyone help me?
Do you think it is grammatical and makes sense? I have this question because the tenses are not consistent: HAS is present, while COULD HAVE BEEN is the past of COULD BE, ad COULD BE should be used here. But I'm not sure; could anyone help me?
Top answer
It is an awkward sentence, but I don't think it's wrong. What would you think of it if it said "the writer has the ability to use a thousand words to say what could have been said in a hundred words"?
- It is an awkward sentence, but I don't think it's wrong.
- What would you think of it if it said "the writer has the ability to use a thousand words to say what could have been said in a hundred words"?
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
It is an awkward sentence, but I don't think it's wrong. What would you think of it if it said "the writer has the ability to use a thousand words to say what could have been said in a hundred words"?
00
I prefer 'could be'. The focus of the sentence is on present ability and present possibility.
Clive
Clive
00
Thanks.
So you think both are correct, depending on the user's preference?
So you think both are correct, depending on the user's preference?
00
0
Is the original question the same as this:
The essay begins with the interesting story of Steve Jobs. Reading on, readers will probably think the essay is going to tell us what the US could give/could have given Steve Jobs, but later....
The essay begins with the interesting story of Steve Jobs. Reading on, readers will probably think the essay is going to tell us what the US could give/could have given Steve Jobs, but later....
00
0
Thanks.
But in that sentence if I want to say what the US was able to give him when he was alive rather than what was possible to be given to him, can COULD be used?
But in that sentence if I want to say what the US was able to give him when he was alive rather than what was possible to be given to him, can COULD be used?
00
I suppose it depends on the point of view of the writer. If he takes us back to a 'now' where eg Jobs is a child, maybe 'could' would be OK.
But if the essay was written after his death, 'could have given' sounds to me like the natural choice.
Clive
But if the essay was written after his death, 'could have given' sounds to me like the natural choice.
Clive
00
CliveI prefer 'could be'. The focus of the sentence is on present ability and present possibility.CliveIn the case discussed both can be used, but sometimes I don't know whether a case is a present possibility:
Context: After a fire, a man testifies in court and says he before the fire feared the potential damage of the electricity box by rain so he
00
A sentence: I don't think such a person would learn/would have learned grammar seriously.
1. Does the correct answer depend on whether the person in question is dead?
2. If yes, do you think the sentence using WOULD LEARN can be interpreted in more than one way?
My argument:
When we say
-When my parents were away, my
1. Does the correct answer depend on whether the person in question is dead?
2. If yes, do you think the sentence using WOULD LEARN can be interpreted in more than one way?
My argument:
When we say
-When my parents were away, my
0
Related Questions