[Grammar] would - what kind of usage is it?

[Kotfor]

This sentence says about an action which happened in the past.

It would have to happen in my last term.

I wonder whether it is the same usage of would here as in

The door wouldn't open.

 

[birdeen's call]

This sentence says about an action which happened in the past.

It would have to happen in my last term.

I wonder whether it is the same usage of would here as in

The door wouldn't open.

It's not the same. Context would help explain the meaning of the sentence. Is there any context?

 

[Kotfor]

This sentences was uttered by a girl after she learnt that her father had remarried. This sentence stands by itself.
PS It doesn't have the meaning of - USED TO -, does it?

 

[birdeen's call]

This sentences was uttered by a girl after she learnt that her father had remarried. This sentence stands by itself.
PS It doesn't have the meaning of - USED TO -, does it?

It doesn't, no.

We have a girl then, and "it" is her father's marriage that happened in the past. She used "would" denoting unreal future. "Her last term", whatever it is, had not yet come, because if it had already passed, she would have said,

It would have to have happened in my last term.

(Or It would have had to happen in my last term, but let's not get into this -- this is not what we're discussing.)

The marriage would not happen in her last term, which would come after the time of her utterance, because it had already happened before she said that.

For example:

(I will change "in my last term" to "tomorrow", because I don't know what the last term could be.)

"Your father married Joan yesterday. Why weren't you there?"
"It would have to happen tommorow. I was planning to visit Dad, but I had no idea he was going to marry her this year. If he'd told me, I'd be there now."

 

[5jj]

I don't agree with you on this one, BC.

'Would' here has the idea of 'This is the behaviour that I have come to expect of him'. It frequently shows disapproval or annoyance:

I wanted to surprise Luke, but Emma would tell him about it before I had the chance.

A: Fred said I couldn't go home early.
B: Well, he would, wouldn't he!

 

[birdeen's call]

I don't agree with you on this one, BC.

'Would' here has the idea of 'This is the behaviour that I have come to expect of him'. It frequently shows disapproval or annoyance:

I wanted to surprise Luke, but Emma would tell him about it before I had the chance.

A: Fred said I couldn't go home early.
B: Well, he would, wouldn't he!

Are we talking about the same sentence, 5jj? I'm talking about this one:

It would have to happen in my last term.

In my opinion, "have to" makes your interpretation impossible.

 

[5jj]

Are we talking about the same sentence, 5jj? We are

It would have to happen in my last term.

In my opinion, "have to" makes your interpretation impossible.

Not impossible, though I admit that my 'This is the behaviour that I have come to expect of him' is more true of 'would' than would have to'. However, both can be used of past-time happenings:

(This sentence was uttered by a girl after she learnt that her father had remarried).

It would happen in my last term - that's the sort of thoughtless thing my father does - give me bad news just as I am preparing for my vital examinations.

It would have to happen in my last term. - That's typical Sod's Law/ Murphy's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - I hear bad news just as I am preparing for my vital examinations.

Other shades of meaning are possible; my point is that to use 'would' (not 'would have') is perfectly acceptable in this reference to past time.

 

[birdeen's call]

I'm aware that "would" can be used to refer to the past, but I must admit I've never seen or heard

It would have to happen...

meaning

It just had to happen... (expressing irritation)

If you say it's possible, then I must accept it, but are you saying that my interpretation is incorrect too? I see no reason why it should be.

 

[5jj]

... are you saying that my interpretation is incorrect too? I see no reason why it should be.

Parts of it. I have copied your post below, with my comments in blue.


We have a girl then, and "it" is her father's marriage that happened in the past. She used "would" denoting unreal future.
As I have suggested, she used "would" with reference to the past.

"Her last term", whatever it is, had not yet come, because if it had already passed, she would have said,

It would have to have happened in my last term. [...]
This is a possible utterance, but it has a different meaning from the one I proposed.

The marriage would not happen in her last term, which would come after the time of her utterance, because it had already happened before she said that.
But it did happen in her last term, the term in which is now studying.

For example:

(I will change "in my last term" to "tomorrow", because I don't know what the last term could be.)

"Your father married Joan yesterday. Why weren't you there?"
"It would have to happen tomorow. I was planning to visit Dad, but I had no idea he was going to marry her this year. If he'd told me, I'd be there now."
I think that here the only natural response is: "It would have had to happen tomorrow". I know we normally associate this structure with a past counterfactual situation, but it is possible here. "It would have to happen tomorrow" allows the possibility, however remote, that it can happen tomorrow. We know it can't, because it has already happened.

Your response would be natural here:
"Your father is marrying Joan tomorrow morning. Are you going to be there?"
"It would have to happen tomorrow afternoon. I have a hospital appointment in the morning."

ps. Note to learners reading this - we are discussing fairly uncommon situations here. Please do not get the impression that "would (have)" is normally as complex as this.

 

[Kotfor]

It would have to happen...

meaning

It just had to happen... (expressing irritation)

I

Again I find similarity with

The door woulsn't open.
He wouldn't stop the car.

The only stronghold which was backing me off is that I never heard it used in affirmative sentences. May be this is an example of this usage though?

 

[5jj]

Again I find similarity with

The door wouldn't open.
He wouldn't stop the car.

The only stronghold which was backing me off is that I never heard it used in affirmative sentences. May be this is an example of this usage though?

It's possible in affirmative sentences:

1. The door would stick when I tried to open it.
2. The engine would keep cutting out when I stopped at traffic lights.

However,this is slightly different from the sentence we have been discussing. We can see the difference in these two examples:

3. My father knew that she was unsuitable, but he would marry her. Then he was upset when she left him two weeks later. (= (roughly) insisted on)

4. It is typical of my father to do something thoughtless like that. He would marry her on a day when I couldn't be there. (stressing the typical behaviour).

Different intonation in speech brings out this difference in meaning.

 

[birdeen's call]

"Your father married Joan yesterday. Why weren't you there?"
"It would have to happen tomorow. I was planning to visit Dad, but I had no idea he was going to marry her this year. If he'd told me, I'd be there now."
I think that here the only natural response is: "It would have had to happen tomorrow". I know we normally associate this structure with a past counterfactual situation, but it is possible here. "It would have to happen tomorrow" allows the possibility, however remote, that it can happen tomorrow. We know it can't, because it has already happened.

I thought in this situation both "would have had to" and "would have to" could be justified. Thanks for this.

 

[5jj]

I thought in this situation both "would have had to" and "would have to" could be justified. Thanks for this.

I am fairly sure that I am right, but it would be helpful to see what others think about this. We are more into the realm of interpretaion than absolutes here.

 

[5jj]

Well I have been grubbing round my books, and come up with the following, from Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language:

Past time would

1. I had no money on me, but he wouldn’t lend me any. [volition. [...] Volitional would is normally excluded from affirmative contexts with singulary dynamic situations.

2. Whenever he heard her coming he would quickly put out his pipe [propensity. This normally involves a serial state, but there is a use of would which can be regarded as a special case of the propensity use and where we do find singulary actualisation in an affirmative context see next example:]

3. HE WOULD call round just when I wanted an early night. [propensity. The modal is always stressed – with an emotive effect […] The connection with the ordinary case of propensity is that the event is presented as typical. What it is typical of is not expressed, but we infer something like ‘typical of the inconvenient/ annoying things that he does or that happen (to me)’ ]

4. Only a few months later their love would change to hate. [futurity]

I have highlighted in blue the relevant words. It seems to me that #3 is very close to Kotfor's original example.. What do you think?

 

[JMurray]

I've been following this thread with interest and I thought it worthwhile to highlight a little more how crucial the intonation is in this case.

As Fivejj and the Cambridge Grammar have indicated:
"Different intonation in speech brings out this difference in meaning".
"The modal is always stressed – with an emotive effect".

Intonation changes: "He would have to come round on a Friday"
from "It is most practical and convenient that he comes on a Friday"
to "How irritating and inconvenient that he came (or 'is coming') on a Friday!"

It's in the particular way that "would" is stressed, the irritated or resigned tone, the implied (or actual) rolling of the eyes.

Regarding the stuck door, this sentence incorporates the meaning being discussed.
"Last night the house caught fire and I couldn't get out, that old door would have to jam right at that moment!"
That is, "how typical of that door .. of my luck .. of life in general!"

not a teacher