Any difference between the meanings of these two sentences?

[Mehrgan]

Hi there,
Would any dear poster please tell me if there is any special context for which they prefer to use one over the other one?

1. He would've had better stay at home.
2. He could've stayed at home.

To my understanding, in the first situation something bad happened after the person left home, while in the second sentence we're only talking about a choice the person had, not necessarily suggesting what he did was wrong or so. Hope I'm not too wrong!

By the way, is there any other structure that a native speake may use to express the same idea as in the first sentence? (Something more simple, perhaps?)


Many thanks in advance!

[Bennevis]

1. He would've had better stay at home. He should've stayed at home.
2. He could've stayed at home. He could've stayed at home.

[5jj]

1. He would've had better stay at home.
2. He could've stayed at home.

To my understanding, in the first situation something bad happened after the person left home, #1 is not correct English. while in the second sentence we're only talking about a choice the person had, not necessarily suggesting what he did was wrong or so.

By the way, is there any other structure that a native speake may use to express the same idea as in the first sentence? (Something more simple, perhaps?)

It would have been better if he had stayed at home.
He would have done better to stay at home.
He should have stayed at home.
He ought to have stayed at home.
It's a pity he didn't stay at home.
If only he had stayed at home.

[Mehrgan]

It would have been better if he had stayed at home.
He would have done better to stay at home.
He should have stayed at home.
He ought to have stayed at home.
It's a pity he didn't stay at home.
If only he had stayed at home.

As helpful as ever...

Best!