0
Anonymous Posted 18 years ago
Grammar
Would have been + participle
Hi,
Do you say the second version is wrong? Would you say the word 'destroyed' is an adjective here?
This place would have been destroyed if there had been a disaster.-- Right?
This place would have been destroyed if there were a disaster. -- Wrong?
Do you say the second version is wrong? Would you say the word 'destroyed' is an adjective here?
This place would have been destroyed if there had been a disaster.-- Right?
This place would have been destroyed if there were a disaster. -- Wrong?
Top answer
Anon: Destroyed is the main verb. It is in the present perfect tense, passive mood. The second version is correct.
- Anon: Destroyed is the main verb.
- It is in the present perfect tense, passive mood.
- The second version is correct.
- It is a form called subjunctive mood.
- There was no disaster, but if there were (had been), it would have had dire consequences!
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
Anon:
Destroyed is the main verb. It is in the present perfect tense, passive mood.
The second version is correct. It is a form called subjunctive mood. There was no disaster, but if there were (had been), it would have had dire consequences!
Destroyed is the main verb. It is in the present perfect tense, passive mood.
The second version is correct. It is a form called subjunctive mood. There was no disaster, but if there were (had been), it would have had dire consequences!
00
AnonymousThis place would have been destroyed if there had been a disaster.-- Right?I would say that the first one is right, in agreement with you.
This place would have been destroyed if there were a disaster. -- Wrong?
The second sounds to me like an attempt to say the first, but accidentally substituting another tense. It's like a
0
Related Questions