We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!

Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com


Share this topic:
This question is Not Answered
Latest post Tue, Feb 17 2004 12:16 PM by Guest. 6 replies.
Suggest an answer | | |
Guest  +  22647 Tue, 17 Feb 04 12:16 PM
They were playing carefully because they could lose the match.
Meanng:
They were playing carefully because there was a chance of their losing the match.
Chameleon  +  22726 Wed, 18 Feb 04 06:13 AM
"They were playing carefully because they could have lost the match."

The verb tense needs to agree with the rest of the sentence. Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with using "could" (but it should be "could have lost" so it matches the past tense of the verb).
Joined on Wed, Feb 18 2004
Full Member 174
azz  +  22762 Wed, 18 Feb 04 12:36 PM
"They were playing carefully because they could have lost the match."

But doesn't it imply that they did not lose the match? What if the speaker doesn't know what the outcome of the match was?

1-When I left, they were playing carefully because they could lose the match.
2-When I left, they were playing carefully because they knew they could lose the match.
3-When I left, they were playing carefully because it was possible that they might lose the match.
4-When I left, they were playing carefully because the other team could win.

What do you think of sentences 1 to 4? Is 1 really wrong, or merely unusual because we normally know the outcome in these situations and use "could have"?
azz
Joined on Sun, Oct 5 2003
New Member 42
whl626, 5 yr 280 days ago
' they could have lost the match ' means they have already won it.
azz  +  22767 Wed, 18 Feb 04 01:12 PM
That was my point. They could have drawn though!!
"They could have lost the match. " in this context implies that they did NOT lose it. They either won, or drew, or may-be the match was cancelled due to bad weather ...
azz
Chameleon  +  22774 Wed, 18 Feb 04 04:18 PM
It looks to me like the predicate doesn't agree. I guess you are right though. But first you are talking in the past perfect continuous, then you switch to present. I know it sounds right, but is it?
rommie  +  22794 Wed, 18 Feb 04 07:22 PM
I think that whl626 and azz are right here, so stick with what they said. You can't really use present tense for the right hand side because that construction is reserved for "known truth"s, which this isn't.

Rommie.
Joined on Mon, Jan 26 2004
Earth orbit
Regular Member 606
© MediaCet Ltd. 2009, v5.0.3614.32638. All content posted by our users is a contribution to the public domain, this does not include imported usenet posts.*
For web related enquires please contact us on webmaster@mediacet.com, status updates are available at status.mediacet.com.
*Usenet post removal: Use 'X-No-Archive'. You may not have understood that your posts would end up in the public domain. Please send proof of the poster's email, we will remove immediately.