0
Pructus Posted 15 years ago
Grammar
Would have PP
Hi,
Below is an excerpt from an American drama, "24, season 3, episode 17".
To be honest with you, I don't know. I still can't believe he survived the blast in Bosnia. They must have captured him, otherwise he would have resurfaced. They would have put him in prison, tortured him for God knows how many years. Now he's holding our government responsible.
*** *** ***
The background fact is that the speaker have been assuming that the man was killedin Bosnia. But it surfaces that he is alive.
Among the two "would have PP"s, the first one is definitely about unreal situation, i.e. He didn't resurface. This kind of "would have PP" is well known, and almost all grammar books deal with this one. But the second one seems to be quite different. Here, the speaker seems to be assuming that they actually put him in prison and tortured him.
So, I inevitably reach the conclusion that "would have PP" has two kinds of interpertation, one is unreal, the other real. Am I correctly understanding? If I am correct, there seems to be no clear cut line that divides the two kinds of "would have PP"s. Therefore, we need to consider the context to figure in what meaning it is used?
Below is an excerpt from an American drama, "24, season 3, episode 17".
To be honest with you, I don't know. I still can't believe he survived the blast in Bosnia. They must have captured him, otherwise he would have resurfaced. They would have put him in prison, tortured him for God knows how many years. Now he's holding our government responsible.
*** *** ***
The background fact is that the speaker have been assuming that the man was killedin Bosnia. But it surfaces that he is alive.
Among the two "would have PP"s, the first one is definitely about unreal situation, i.e. He didn't resurface. This kind of "would have PP" is well known, and almost all grammar books deal with this one. But the second one seems to be quite different. Here, the speaker seems to be assuming that they actually put him in prison and tortured him.
So, I inevitably reach the conclusion that "would have PP" has two kinds of interpertation, one is unreal, the other real. Am I correctly understanding? If I am correct, there seems to be no clear cut line that divides the two kinds of "would have PP"s. Therefore, we need to consider the context to figure in what meaning it is used?
Top answer
" The first, as you note, is clearly about an unreal situation but so is the second, thus: And if he had resurfaced they would have put him in prison, tortured him for *** knows how many years.
- " The first, as you note, is clearly about an unreal situation but so is the second, thus: And if he had resurfaced they would have put him in prison, tortured him for *** knows how many years.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
11 Answers
0
Allow me to expand and I hope clarify the second "would have."
The first, as you note, is clearly about an unreal situation but so is the second, thus:
And if he had resurfaced they would have put him in prison, tortured him for *** knows how many years.
The first, as you note, is clearly about an unreal situation but so is the second, thus:
And if he had resurfaced they would have put him in prison, tortured him for *** knows how many years.
00
0
After second thought...
The fact is that he hasn't resurfaced until now. The speaker is saying that the reason he hasn't resurfaced is that they must have captured him, i.e. He has been in a captured state until now.
So, I cannot help keep thinking that the second "would have PP" must mean something different from the first "would have PP".
The fact is that he hasn't resurfaced until now. The speaker is saying that the reason he hasn't resurfaced is that they must have captured him, i.e. He has been in a captured state until now.
So, I cannot help keep thinking that the second "would have PP" must mean something different from the first "would have PP".
00
pructusSo, I inevitably reach the conclusion that "would have PP" has two kinds of interpertation, one is unreal, the other real. Am I correctly understanding?I believe you understand it correctly. The second would have can be seen as a would have of past probability.
We are certain they captured him. If they had not captured him,
00
pructusThe speaker is saying that the reason he hasn't resurfaced is that they must have captured him"must have captured him" meaning something like "surely they captured him" or "I can't believe they didn't capture him."
The fact that he has resurfaced means, regardless of anyone's belief, that he wasn't in fact captured. There must be some other ex
00
Thanks again, Calif!!
Thanks always for your crystal clear answers...
Thanks always for your crystal clear answers...
00
Thanks a lot Malrey...
I agree with your theory of "live action cartoon"...
I never thought that way at first, but as the seasons go on, now I figure.
I agree with your theory of "live action cartoon"...
I never thought that way at first, but as the seasons go on, now I figure.
00
1. Original text, Pructus: They must have captured him, otherwise he would have resurfaced.
2. Later post, MalRey: The fact that he has resurfaced ... he wasn't in fact captured.
I can't figure out how to get from 1 to 2!
2. Later post, MalRey: The fact that he has resurfaced ... he wasn't in fact captured.
I can't figure out how to get from 1 to 2!
00
CalifJimI can't figure out how to get from 1 to 2!The character in question (let's say Jack
00
MalReyMaybe you have to have watched some episodes of 24 to see the implications.No, I haven't. I guess you "had to be there".
0
Related Questions