It was possible

[azz]

a. It was possible for her to have stolen the ring.

Does that mean
1. It was possible that she had stolen the ring.
or
2. She could have stolen the ring (but didn't).

 

[White Hat]

My language experience tells me it's the second option. Try this.

 

[Tarheel]

a. It was possible for her to have stolen the ring.

Absent context, I would say it means she could have stolen the ring. (She had the means and the opportunity.) However, she didn't do it

It's an artificial sentence, and it's not anything anybody would say.

 

[Barque]

I agree it means she could have stolen the ring. But it doesn't by itself suggest that she didn't. She may or may not have.

 

[5jj]

Does that mean
1. It was possible that she had stolen the ring.
or
2. She could have stolen the ring (but didn't).

Try to give us a choice using minimal pairs, for example:


Pair No. 1:
1a. It was possible that she had stolen the ring. It turned out that she had stolen it.
1b. It was possible that she had stolen the ring. It turned out that she hadn't stolen it.

Pair No, 2:
2a. She could have stolen the ring. It turned out that she had stolen it.
2b: She could have stolen the ring. It turned out that she hadn't stolen it.

 

[Tarheel]

Why would you speculate about what somebody had done if at the time you said that you knew what had really happened?

 

[emsr2d2]

We know nothing except that, if the ring was indeed stolen, she was possibly the culprit. We know no more.

 

[Tarheel]

@emsr2d2 Exactly!

"It was possible for her to have stolen the ring."

The ring might not even be missing.