should have done

1 2

Share on Facebook

Marius Hancu

#541838 Tue, 15 Jul 08 02:43 PM

If you want to put more doubt on him doing that you could also say:

(This is present/future, not past.)

In my opinion, should he do that kind of thing, he will meet so and so consequences.

which could considered in BrE to be coloured-future (i.e. something colored by your emotions/opinions, see:

SHALL AND WILL

Rule 2. The Coloured-Future System

http://www.bartleby.com/116/213.html#2

This part in Fowler is the absolute authority on traditional/prescriptive should in BrE usage, as I understand, but it's not easy to read, but I've found it of great help when reading classical English novels.

BTW, as you see, there's no if in this version, thus should can be used in that clause in standard speech, with the inversion causing the conditional meaning.

This version may be more BrE than AmE.

Marius Hancu

Joined on Wed, Apr 26 2006

Montreal, Canada

Veteran Member (11,673)

Clauses, Conditionals

Mr Wordy

#541846 Tue, 15 Jul 08 02:53 PM

pructus
It seems to be saying that atter Y2K, people now knows what to do, and what not to do…

To me, no, and this is confirmed by the fact that he explicitly says "I'm not sure it did".

pructus
If anyone should have done greater things than walking dusty roads and talking with people too dense to understand him, it was Jesus.
------------> This one is saying, "It was Jesus." in past tense. So, this one seems, to me, to be saying that, "If anyone had done greater things than ~~~, it was Jesus who did it."

The use of the past tense does not preclude the "ought to" meaning. Randomly Googled through Book Search:

If anyone should have known, it was the designer. A designer's role is to inspect installations and to recommend any necessary precautions to preserve them.

Clearly the "ought to have known" meaning is intended.

Mr Wordy

Joined on Tue, May 27 2008

Regular Member (960)

Native British English speaker

Mr Wordy

#541858 Tue, 15 Jul 08 03:20 PM

Marius Hancu
This is all present/future time, not past. Perhaps Mr. Wordy has other suggestions.

A few possibilites that come to mind:

If he does that [in the future], he will be arrested [in the future].

If he did that [in the future], he would be arrested [in the future]. (more doubt)

Were he to do that [in the future] .. (more doubt, formal)

If he did that [in the past, maybe he did, maybe he didn't], he will be arrested [in the future].

If he had done that [in the past, but he didn't], he would have been arrested [in the past].

Mr Wordy

pructus

#542102 Wed, 16 Jul 08 12:15 AM

Thanks Marius and Mr Wordy..
I think I need some more time on this part..
Thanks a lot for the tips..

pructus

Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004

Full Member (293)

Huevos

#542262 Wed, 16 Jul 08 08:53 AM

Marius Hancu
what you have on the left is considered non-standard these days (no should/would in the if clause).

Why? I agree with you in the case of "would" but maybe not in the case of "should". "Should" and "were" both lend themselves to inversion, while "would" does not. Not that that proves anything though since simple present and past can't be inverted either without the clause losing its meaning, just my little theory though. Can you point me to a valid resource where it says using "should" in an "if clause" is frowned upon?

Huevos

Joined on Tue, Mar 25 2008

Spain

Regular Member (548)

British Native

Clauses, Simple present

Marius Hancu

#542295 Wed, 16 Jul 08 11:05 AM

-------

if clauses—the traditional rules. According to traditional rules, you use the subjunctive to describe an occurrence that you have presupposed to be contrary to fact

if I were ten years younger, if America were still a British Colony.

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

---------

What is allowed under subjunctive mood is described in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood

Some (but they are a small minority, mainly used in BrE) of those subjunctive mood forms contain should. Those are allowed under an if clause:

If I should go, then will you feed the hens? [should go is a future subjunctive

----------

We can use 'should' in 'if clauses' when we believe that the possibility of something happening is small.

If you should happen to see him before I do, can you tell him that I want to speak to him urgently?
If there should be a problem, just give me a call and I'll sort it out.
If anyone should ask where I am, say I'm in a meeting.

http://www.englishgrammarsecrets.com/should2/menu.phpl

--------

Marius Hancu

Clauses, Subjunctives

Huevos

#542391 Wed, 16 Jul 08 02:52 PM

Hi Marius,

We are at cross purposes. I totally agree with what you posted but what I was really asking for was a resource that says using "should" in an "if" clause is "non-standard" in contemporary English.