We could have visited Italian restaurant as well.

[sania-baharat]

My friend and I went on a trip two days ago.

Now, we are talking together on the phone. Are these correct?

1. I wish we could have spent more time together.
2. We could have visited Italian restaurant as well.
3. The weather could have been much colder but it was not that cold. Thank goodness!
4. You must have been so excited after meeting me in person!
5. I should have told you how I felt when I first met you!

 

[tedmc]

2. We could have gone to an Italian restaurant/Italian restaurants as well.

 

[Tdol]

Or the Italian restaurant if we know which one, or it was the only one in town.

 

[sania-baharat]

Thank you all.
Are the rest OK? Is the sentence #2 incorrect if I use "visit"?

 

[teechar]

Thank you all.
Are the rest OK? [STRIKE]Is the[/STRIKE] Would sentence #2 be incorrect if I were to use "visit"?

Note that "visit" (regardless of tense) would make the sentence very unusual. As pointed out by tedmc above, use "go to" instead.

Then, your question becomes: how about the following?
We could go to the/an Italian restaurant.

The answer is that the meaning of the above sentence is completely different from that of sentence #2 earlier.

 

[bubbha]

Using "visit" with a restaurant might be appropriate if you go there to look at the decor, or speak to the manager, or peruse the menu, but then leave without eating.

Normally we use "go to", "eat at", or even "try" (first time only) if we want to imply eating.

 

[probus]

4. I was very excited to meet or have met you in person, if the person you met is or was famous. Your version of number 4 may be grammatical, but it sounds silly and fatuous unless you are some grand personage.

 

[Tdol]

And even then it sounds very haughty.

 

[tedmc]

I think OP did not mean it that way like he/she was going to pass judgement on somebody. It was probably something more positive or complimentary like:

I should have told you how happy I felt when I first met you.

 

[Raymott]

Not possible, ted. A better cognate sentence would be "You should have told me how happy you felt when you first met me."

 

[tedmc]

Raymott
Why is it not possible with "I" but possible with "you"?

 

[jutfrank]

I should have told you how I felt when I first met you!

I should have told you how happy I felt when I first met you.

You should have told me how happy you felt when you first met me.

Since sania-baharat uses I as subject, tedmc's suggestion was correct.

 

[Raymott]

Sorry, I misread the thread. I was responding to sentence 4., posts 7, 8. I assumed that tedmc's post#9 was also commenting on #7, 8.

 

[tzfujimino]

I assumed that tedmc's post#9 was also commenting on #7, 8.

So did I.

 

[tedmc]

Sorry, I misread the thread. I was responding to sentence 4., posts 7, 8. I assumed that tedmc's post#9 was also commenting on #7, 8.

Raymott
You have not answered my qestion in post #11.

 

[tedmc]

You must have been so excited after meeting me in person cannot possibly mean anything like I should have told you how happy I felt when I first met you.

Does #5 have to follow from #4?

 

[Raymott]

Raymott
You have not answered my qestion in post #11.

I did, in post #13.

 

[Tdol]

Threads can get a bit messy. ;-)

 

[Raymott]

They can. I've just left another one like this (the 'comrade' thread). Once you're up to five or six posts, new posts very often do not answer the original post, but there is no specific post that you want to quote. I'm trying to think of a solution. For my posts, if it doesn't address the OP, and doesn't address the post immediately preceding it, I'd put some clarifying context, and ideally a quote. I think I do that, but don't quote me!

 

[jutfrank]

For my posts, if it doesn't address the OP, and doesn't address the post immediately preceding it, I'd put some clarifying context, and ideally a quote.

When not addressing the OP I tend always to quote what I am addressing even if it's the post directly above. I think if everybody got into a habit of doing that we could often avoid some confusion and mess.