Would/ might have it

[tufguy]

Could you please explain me the meaning and difference between these sentences? I am confused.

1) "I thought he would have it".

2) "I thought he might have it".

3) "I thought he might have had it".

 

[GoesStation]

1) At some point in the past, I thought it likely that he had it.
2) At some point in the past, I thought it possible that he had it.
3) At some point in the past, I thought it possible that he had it at an earlier time. .

 

[tufguy]

Could you please elaborate it in simpler and detailed language? I am very confused about it, so please explain.

 

[Rover_KE]

GS's examples are just about as simple as they could be.

If they were any more detailed you would find it even harder to understand.

 

[tufguy]

Sorry, I am still confused about "would, might and might have had". Could you please tell me in what kind of situation do we need to use "would" or "might" or "might have had" when talking about past incidents? Sorry for asking for simpler language, actually it is difficult to understand sometimes when English is your second language.

 

[tufguy]

I think first two sentences mean same, there was a possibility that he had it(but it's like future in past) but in the last one he possible had it but at an earlier point from the time that we are talking about. But "would" and "might" both have same meaning then why to use both? And "might have done" is only used when talking about an earlier period in past. Please check this "when we lived there he might have had it" this also sounds same to me.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Could you please elaborate it in simpler and detailed language? I am very confused about it, so please explain.

GS's answer is simple and correct.

As GS pointed out:

- The word "might" shows more uncertainty than "would." Look the two words up in your dictonary to see the difference.

- "Might have it" means NOW. "Might have HAD it" means in the past, because "had" is past tense.

 

[GoesStation]

1) At some point in the past, I thought it likely that he had it.
2) At some point in the past, I thought it possible that he had it.
3) At some point in the past, I thought it possible that he had it at an earlier time. .

I think first two sentences mean same, there was a possibility that he had it(but it's like future in past) but in the last one he possible had it but at an earlier point from the time that we are talking about. But "would" and "might" both have same meaning then why to use both? And "might have done" is only used when talking about an earlier period in past. Please check this "when we lived there he might have had it" this also sounds same to me.

I can see why my three sentences above are not clear, so I'll write longer narratives.

1) I was thinking about him last Wednesday. I thought, "he probably has it."
2) I was thinking about him last Wednesday. I thought, "he may have it. I'm not sure."
3) I was thinking about him last Wednesday. I thought, "he may have had it two years ago. I'm not sure."

Notice that might changed to may when my character used it in a present sense.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . Notice that might changed to may when my character used it in a present sense.

Interesting! I generally just use may to convey permission: May I have the hot sauce?

My dad, however, would have said: Might I have the hot sauce?

(Actually, now that I think of it, he hated hot sauce. . . .)

 

[tufguy]

Okay, now I understand.

Please check.

I went to his home this saturday to borrow hammar because I thought he would/might have it.

When we talk about past we just have to use "would" or "might" if there was a probability of that person having the thing that we wanted or thinking about at that exact time in past. We don't have to use "might have done" here.

Earlier I used to use "might have had" only for past.

So when we use "might have had" we talk about an earlier time like "last month I went to his house to borrow hammer because I thought he might have had it(so it means that I am saying that he had hammer somewhere in past but not at the time I went to his home)".

Sorry to bother you again and again but I want to clear my doubt and thank you very much for help.

 

[Raymott]

A little off-topic:
"... then why to use both?" (post #8)
This is another example of an incorrect question similar to "How to...?" In this case, you can say "... then why use both?", just as you can say "Why tell lies?" but not "Why to tell lies?"

 

[tufguy]

Please answer this and my doubt will be gone.

 

[tufguy]

Okay, now I understand.

Please check.

I went to his home this saturday to borrow hammar because I thought he would/might have it.

When we talk about past we just have to use "would" or "might" if there was a probability of that person having the thing that we wanted or thinking about at that exact time in past. We don't have to use "might have done" here.

Earlier I used to use "might have had" only for past.

So when we use "might have had" we talk about an earlier time like "last month I went to his house to borrow hammer because I thought he might have had it(so it means that I am saying that he had hammer somewhere in past but not at the time I went to his home)".

Sorry to bother you again and again but I want to clear my doubt and thank you very much for help.

Please answer this and my doubt will get cleared.

 

[tufguy]

Reply guys please. Please I need your replies. Just answer my last question please. I know you have given me enough replies but in order to get rid of this confusion I just need a last reply please.

 

[jutfrank]

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding your exact question.

• I went to his house because I thought he might have my hammer.
  

This probably means you went to his house to collect your hammer.

• I went to his house because I thought he might have had it.

This sentence basically means you thought he had it at at time before your arrival but not at the time when you went there. Maybe you were trying to trace your hammer's movements.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Okay, now I understand.

Please check.

I went to his home last Saturday [or just Saturday] to borrow a hammer because I thought he would/might [either is fine] have one.

When we talk about past, we just have to use "would" or "might" if there was a probability of that person having the thing that we wanted or thinking about at that exact time in past. Are you saying "just" in the sense of "only"? If you are, then "would" means it's probable and "might" means it's possible.

We don't have to use "might have done" here. We don't have to use "have done." Using "might" is your choice.

Earlier I used to use "might have had" only for past. Using "had" for the past is correct.

So when we use "might have had" we are talking about an earlier time like "last month I went to his house to borrow hammer because I thought he might have had it," [no parentheses] it it means that I am saying that he had a hammer somewhere in past but not at the time I went to his home". That does not make sense. You wouldn't go to get the hammer if you knew he didn't have it now.

Sorry to bother you again and again, but I want to clear my doubt. Thank you very much for help.

When we say "might," it means that we are not certain.

 

[tufguy]

When we say "might," it means that we are not certain.

I didn't get your question "are you saying just in the sense of only?"

Thank you for your replies "Jutfrank and Charlie".

 

[tufguy]

Are you saying "just" in the sense of "only"?

Sorry I didn't get your question.

Thanks for the reply " Jutfrank and Charlie", thank you very much.

Ignore my last reply.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I didn't get your question "are you saying just in the sense of only?"

Thank you for your replies "Jutfrank and Charlie".

I was making sure I was reading ". . .we just have to use "would" or "might". . . ." correctly. I thought that you were using "just" to mean "only," but you might have been using it to mean "absolutely."

Don't worry. This is NOT an important point! I'm sorry that I confused you.