0
Anonymous Posted 18 years ago
Grammar

'Would have been' usage

Hi,

I like to know that the following sentences are correct or not and what is the exact difference in both of them
In these sentences actually I want to express that "by now they have reached UK" but I am not sure about the fact that they have reached or not.

1) They would have been reached UK
2) They would have reached UK

Thanks in Advance
  

Top answer

Your construction don't fit you aim to say they have reached UK. Anonymous They would have been reached UK Wrong. Passive form here is out of place.

— Fandorin

  • Your construction don't fit you aim to say they have reached UK.
  • Anonymous They would have been reached UK Wrong.
  • Passive form here is out of place.
  • Anonymous 2) They would have reached UK It means they was able to reach UK but they didn't.
  • If you want to say that state being in UK is not sure to happen you could use: They could/might/may/should/will reach UK now.
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
Your construction don't fit you aim to say they have reached UK.
AnonymousThey would have been reached UK
Wrong. Passive form here is out of place.
Anonymous2) They would have reached UK
It means they was able to reach UK but they didn't.

If you want to say that state being in UK is not sure to happen you cou
0
0
AnonymousI want to express that "by now they have reached UK" but I am not sure about the fact that if they have reached it or not.
If you're sure:
They have reached the UK (by now).
If you are not sure:
They should have reached the UK (by now).

They [m
0
0
it is really nice, i understood by your explanation. thank you so much.
0

Related Questions