If you were/had been here last week, you would have met him.

[Tait-ka]

A) If you were here last week, you would have met him.
B) If you had been here last week, you would have met him.

I created the sentences.

Can I please ask, what's the difference in meaning between A and B?

 

[5jj]

You created them. You tell us.

 

[Tait-ka]

You created them. You tell us.

I think the difference is just of "were" and "had been".

Let me use names for "you" and "him".
Suppose,
you = Tom
him = Bill

I think both sentences mean the same: they mean that Tom was not here last week. If he (Tom) had been here, he (Tom) would have met Bill.

Am I right?

 

[jutfrank]

Please don't ask us what you mean because only you know that. Please tell us what you mean first, and then we'll tell you which words you should say.

 

[Tait-ka]

Please don't ask us what you mean because only you know that. Please tell us what you mean first, and then we'll tell you which words you should say.

Thanks. I forgot to tell my thinking in the first post. Now I have told in post#3 what they mean.

 

[jutfrank]

Now I have told in post#3 what they mean.

No, you haven't done that. You just said what you think they mean.

Anyway, it's clear enough that you're asking which sentence to use. Sentence B) is the correct sentence (this is called by teachers a 'third conditional' sentence) and yes, you seem to understand how this kind of sentence is used.

 

[Tait-ka]

No, you haven't done that. You just said what you think they mean.

Anyway, it's clear enough that you're asking which sentence to use. Sentence B) is the correct sentence (this is called by teachers a 'third conditional' sentence) and yes, you seem to understand how this kind of sentence is used.

Is sentence A wrong?

 

[jutfrank]

Is sentence A wrong?

Yes. The correct sentence is B, which uses the past perfect in the condition clause to express an imagined past.