+0
Dear teachers,

Is there any difference between the 02 sentences below :

1/ I was to meet Mr Brown tomorrow but the appointment has been cancelled so I can't meet him then

2/ I was to have met Mr Brown tomorrow but the appointment has been cancelled so I can't meet him then .

Tanks in advance
1 2
Comments  
The second sentence should not be used for a future situation. I was to have met Mr Brown last night.

Thank you Mister Micawber , but these two sentences are from Longman dictionary , they are not mine . Longman dictionary says:

Quote : " was to/was to have+past participle /was going to can be used to describe events which are hindered or prevented(....but):

I was to see/ was going to see/ was to have seen Mr Kay tomorrow ,but the appointment has been cancelled.

Notethe possible ambiguity of :

. I was going to see Mr Kay ( the meeting did or did not take place )

compare with :

I was to have seen Mr Kay ( I did not see him ) "

Unquote

I am very confused so please help me understand this point.

Thanks and best regards
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Longman's 'explanation', if quoted accurately, makes little sense to me.

1-- I see no ambiquity in 'I was going to see, but'-- it indicates that the meeting did not take place.
2-- Similarly, 'I was to see, but' = 'I was to have seen, but' -- the meeting did not take place.

Although I personally see no point in using the perfect infinitive for the future here, it does in fact have a name: 'the past in the future'. The meanings are the same; they merely reflect different perspectives by the speaker: the 'past in the future' views the event as having /not having been completed, the future event is viewed from a more future point-- that is, (here) the cancelled meeting is viewed as an accomplished fact from slightly farther in the future. Meanwhile, the simple infinitive (here) places the future events (cancelling and recognizing the cancellation) at the same future point.
Sorry for bothering you to much Mister Micawber ,but I 'm really confused about this issue . how about the sentence in the the Practical English Grammar by A.J. Thomsom and A.V Martinet:

The Lord Mayor was to have laid the foundation stone , but he was taken ill last night so the Lady Mayoress is doing it instead .

Thanks
Monalisatuan
The Lord Mayor was to have laid the foundation stone , but he was taken ill last night so the Lady Mayoress is doing it instead .

Although the laying of the stone is in the future, the aborted plan to lay it is in the past.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Hi , Avangi ,

But if so why should we not say " Iwas to see/ was to have seen Mr Kay tomorrow ,but the appointment has been cancelled. "?

Here , the plan to see Mr Kay is in the future ,but the aborted plan is in the past.

Plase help me with clearer explanation.

Best regards
MonalisatuanSorry for bothering you to much Mister Micawber ,but I 'm really confused about this issue . how about the sentence in the the Practical English Grammar by A.J. Thomsom and A.V Martinet:

The Lord Mayor was to have laid the foundation stone , but he was taken ill last night so the Lady Mayoress is doing it instead .

Thanks
Is it possible that the plan was to have the stone laid last night, but since the Lord Mayer was ill, it was re-scheduled and the Lady Mayoress is going to do it tonight?
How about this?

I was to have met Mr Brown tomorrow by the time you come but the appointment has been cancelled so I won't be able to tell you tomorrow what he thinks about the issue.

The meeting was planned to have finished earlier than your arrival, that's why the perfect tense. Does that make sense?
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more