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 Answered
1 verified answer
Latest post Sat, Aug 15 2009 3:55 PM by keepsmiling. 3 replies.
Suggest an answer | | |
Grammar Geek  +  862249 Fri, 14 Aug 09 10:00 PM
Help - I was asked about this and I thought myself in circles. 


If he had needed me, I would have had... [to go] [to have gone].


Which one? Why? (I have really manged to confuse myself. I really think only the second sounds right, but I can't explain the back shift.)


I think "I would have to go" but "I would had to have gone" - we back shift one, so we back shift the other. But is it that simple?


Thank you!!


Best answer by Yankee  +  862336 Fri, 14 Aug 09 11:15 PM
Grammar Geek
“If he had needed me, I would have had... [to go] [to have gone].”
Hi Barb


I guess this is the way I would look at it:


If he had needed me, I would have had to go. --> This sounds fine to me. At the moment you found out about his need, your going would have still been in the future.


Granted, this is a different meaning of "have to", but I think it illustrates the point I'm trying to make:

If he had screamed, he would have had to have been in serious trouble. -->In this theoretical situation, the trouble started before he screamed, or the start of the trouble and the scream happened roughly simultaneously. Viewed in relation to the time of the scream, there is no way you can say that the serious trouble was still in the future.

All the other replies..
Grammar Geek  +  862382 Fri, 14 Aug 09 11:59 PM
Thanks - this became one of those things where the more times I said them outloud, the weirder they both started to sound!


keepsmiling  +  863349 Sat, 15 Aug 09 03:55 PM
Sir,i am still perplexed from your explaination, could you be quite clear more by giving more examples to understand it..

        It would rather be very kind of you.................i am regretted for any grammar or spelling mistakes.

Joined on Fri, Dec 5 2008
Delhi
Junior Member 59
© 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.