he would have met her.

Status
Not open for further replies.

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
Can I refer to 1's underlined as "imaginary result"? I think definitely I can.
What about 2? Can it be called as "imaginary result" as well?

I'm asking this as so far I have thought of "would/could/might have pp" as counterfactual statement, but that doesn't seem to help to explain 2 much.

I'd like think in terms of "imaginary result". Then "imaginary result" can either be a counterfactual statement or a predictive(presumption) statement depending on its context or conditional. I mean, in 1, the counterfactual conditional "if he had come" affects its being counterfactual, while in 2, the presumption "if he came" affects its being presumption.

1. I know for sure that he didn't come to the meeting. If he had come, he would(could/might) have met her.
2. I don't know if he came to the meeting. If he came, he would(could/might) have met her.
 

probus

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I don't think this involves deep questions such as conditional, counter-factual, etc. It's just that the pluperfect tense is fading away in modern usage. In both of your examples "If he had come" is correct in terms of sequence of tenses, but it sounds old-fashioned and people just don't bother to be correct anymore. Instead they tend to say "If he came" in both cases.

What I do not know is how long this trend has been going on. Probably all my life and I am 65. But maybe a lot longer. Scholars?
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I don't think this involves deep questions such as conditional, counter-factual, etc. It's just that the pluperfect tense is fading away in modern usage. In both of your examples "If he had come" is correct in terms of sequence of tenses, but it sounds old-fashioned and people just don't bother to be correct anymore. Instead they tend to say "If he came" in both cases.
The past perfect is not fading away in counterfactual conditionals.

1. I know for sure that he didn't come to the meeting. If he had come, he would(could/might) have met her.
2. I don't know if he came to the meeting. If he came, he would(could/might) have met her.
#1 is a counterfactual conditional, and the past perfect is essential. 'He' did not come to the meeting and he did not meet 'her'.
#2 is very different. It is possible that 'he' came. If he did not come, then clearly he did not meet 'her', but if he came, then it is certain/possible that he met her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top