Student or Learner
If I had been studying that course, I would have/could have completed the course by now.
If I had been following that strict regime, I would have/could have attained the desirable result by now.
In both of the above sentences, Which option is better? and why? IF both are ok, Could I please get a brief thought as to why both are correct?
Thanks in advance,
Last edited by 2006; 10-Sep-2009 at 21:08. Reason: revision
In other words, "could have" indicates would have had a chance.
would have done it - This means the result was going to be satisfied with the right condition in the past, but the condition, or conditions, did not exist in the past.
could have done it - This means it was possibe for the result to be satisfied, but the past condition did not exist to allow it to happen.
might have done it - This that maybe the result was going to be satisfied but it was made impossible by the fact that the condition did not exist in the past to allow it.
The phrase "might have done" is similar to "maybe "someone" or "something" might have done".
The phrase "would have done" is definite, or at the very least much more probable, as an assertion that something was possible given the correct conditions in the past, but, of course, those conditions did not exist.
The other two "could have done" and "might have done" are not definite and don't carry the same degree of high probability. The phrase "would have done" is stronger, more probable, and more definite when it comes to asserting what was possible in the past under certain conditions.
If I had been studying that course, I likely&probably/almost certainly would have completed the course by now.
'should' & 'must' don't work here because the necessary knowledge, the process of logical deduction isn't available but that still presents a golden opportunity to let ESLs see that,
almost certainly = must
probably/likely = should