"If you knew what I had gone through, you would surely pity me." Can I change had into have in the sentence above? No. If you possibly can, you need to keep all the parts of the sentence in the same point of view with regard to

The secret to understanding the word "would" is looking at the history of the verb "will" O.E. *willan, wyllan "to wish, desire, want" (past tense wolde ), I didn't know of that meaning of 'will'.

Here are my opinions. Two different should 's are possible: the should of expectation should- exp the should of advice should- adv should- adv is much more common than should- exp . should-exp expresses an evaluation of the situation with

SHALL AND WILL IT is unfortunate that the idiomatic use, while it comes by nature to southern Englishmen (who will find most of this section superfluous), is so complicated that those who are not to the manner born can hardly

Mister Micawber wrote: I see no grammatical form or semantic meaning in had have had , I don't dispute you, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. And I can infer semantic meaning. Presumably that's because I'm used to hearing both

Hi people! Is this sentence correct? "The auxiliary should be in the same tense as the action we are comparing". When do we use the same that and when the same as? E.g: He is the same age as his wife. I bought the same car as

Have has many meanings as a transitive verb and two usages as a verbal auxiliary. Transitive verb: -I have a car. -He had three sons. -He had his opponent cornered. -I have a letter to write. He had a concert to conduct. ---

Goldmund wrote: PASTEL wrote: From "Advanced Grammar in Use, Chapetr 11" We can use will or going to with little difference in meaning in the main clause of an if-sentence when we say that something is conditional on something else-it

PASTEL wrote: From "Advanced Grammar in Use, Chapetr 11" We can use will or going to with little difference in meaning in the main clause of an if-sentence when we say that something is conditional on something else-it will happen if

Hello Casi I think this way about the tense of . In the sense of , can be reckoned as the past form of in the meaning as well as syntactically. (EX) I cannot swim now, but I could swim as fast as 100 m a minute when young. (EX) He said "I