0
Anonymous Posted 16 years ago
Grammar

Translating

Hi,

Is this right in present and past tense: a) He doubts that John will surrender so quickly.(future in the present) b) He doubted that John would surrender so quickly.(future in the past). But what tense is this: He doubted that John would have surrendered so quickly (is this past within past?!)

He gets up so that the people can see him (future in the present). He got up so that the people could see him. (future in the past). Again, what is this: He got up so that the people could have seen him (is it also past within past because I am sure this isn't future in the past).

Regards,
  

Top answer

-- Yes. But what tense is this: He doubted that John would have surrendered so quickly [if it had really been John holed up in that saloon]-- Conditional III. He got up so that the people could have seen him [if they had tried to do so]-- Conditional III.

  • -- Yes.
  • But what tense is this: He doubted that John would have surrendered so quickly [if it had really been John holed up in that saloon]-- Conditional III.
  • He got up so that the people could have seen him [if they had tried to do so]-- Conditional III.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

3 Answers
0
Is this right in present and past tense?-- Yes.
But what tense is this: He doubted that John would have surrendered so quickly [if it had really been John holed up in that saloon]-- Conditional III.

He got up so that the people could have seen him [if they had tried to do so]-- Conditional III.
0
Thanks, but isn't conditional only used in if statements? But here, there is no condition to be fulfilled, right? Or, do we assume that 'would have/could have' always means a degree of uncertainty and therefore conditional?
0
Yes, it is an implied conditional; otherwise, the verb form is wrong.

Related Questions