+0
Hi,

In the passage below, the "should have completed" refers to the future time events?

As this article says to have been written on March 7, Monday, it seems to refer to the future time.

"Should have p.p." can refer to the future?

  • ASIA BUSINESS MARCH 7, 2011, 3:09 P.M. ET


  • BRUSSELS—NATO military planners should have completed an assessment of a no-fly zone in Libya in time for the issue to be considered by alliance defense ministers at a meeting in Brussels on Thursday, according to the U.S. ambassador to NATO, Ivo Daalder.

    He told reporters that NATO had decided Monday to start round-the-clock surveillance of Libya using AWACS aircraft. Until now, the aircraft have been operating 10 hours a day tracking air and ground traffic in and around Libya.

    A meeting of ambassadors to NATO in Brussels received an assessment Monday from military planners on what the 28-nation alliance might do to help humanitarian operations. The ambassadors will meet again Tuesday and Wednesday to discuss the issue.

    In coming days, military assessments should be completed into a no-fly zone and how to enforce an arms embargo, Mr. Daalder said.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703883504576186710836644734.html
    +0
    Hi,

    Yes. It's a forecast/prediction that something will be completed by that time.

    eg When Tom gets home tomrrow at 6pm, his wife should have cooked dinner, so they will be able to eat immediately.

    Clive.
    Comments  
    Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
    Thanks a lot, Clive!!

    I have never seen this one until now, that "should have p.p." can refer to the future time.

    Is it just native speakers' natural sense?

    Or, can we find any material that explains as you explain?

    And, if is is so, then "would have p.p." and "could have p.p." can also refer to the future time?
    Hi,

    Are you first familiar with the Future Perfect?
    eg She will have cooked dinner by 6pm tomorrow?

    Clive
    Sure, of course, that is so common, written on every grammar book.

    But that that one can also be used in future time reference is so rare.

    I have never seen that until now.

    But I see your explanation makes sense.
    Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?