0

I've just started reading the English translation of Crime And Punishment, and come across the following sentences where the usage of past perfect tense has confused me:

He was so badly dressed that even a man accustomed to shabbiness would have been ashamed to be seen in the street in such rags. In that quarter of the town, however, scarcely any shortcoming in dress would have created surprise. Owing to the proximity of the Hay Market, the number of establishment of bad character, the preponderance of trading and working class population crowded in these streets and alleys in the heart of Petersburg, types so various were to be seen in the streets that no figure, however queer, would have caused surprise.

The use of past perfect appears in each of the three sentences. In all of them, for me, "would" instead of "would have" seems to be clearer. "Would have" leads me to read them through a subjunctive or a speculative mood, which I don't see them should imply, according to the scene being described. Or they do imply something that I've missed? Could you guys share your opinions. Thanks.

Improve this question
1
  • Could you please give the English translation. The correct one.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Dec 5, 2013 at 20:25

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

Maybe I’m missing some point, but it seems to me that “would have” is required because the paragraph is set in the past.      “… no figure, however queer, would cause surprise” reads as a present tense statement, and surely you aren’t suggesting “… no figure … would caused surprise.

Improve this answer
5
  • I think I didn't make my point clear enough about why I thought "would" makes sense. If the book were written in present tense, it would be, take the first sentence: He is so badly dressed that even a man accustomed to shabbiness would be ashamed to be seen in the street in such rags. "Would be" gives the sentence a speculative notion, implying "if there were a man accustomed to shabbiness, he would be ashamed." But according the the context, the notion seems to be very affirmative, which is:
    – JJcat
    Dec 7, 2013 at 0:20
  • He is so badly dressed that even a man accustomed to shabbiness will be ashamed to be seen in the street in such rags. "Will" instead of "would" makes more sense to me. In this case, when it's written in past tense, isn't it supposed to be "would be ashamed" rather than "would've been ashamed"? The same reason applies to other two sentences. Does my point make sense? Or "would've" is the only correct choice here?
    – JJcat
    Dec 7, 2013 at 0:30
  • Well, you’re still not being very clear. Twice now you’ve said that “would” makes sense [as an alternative to “would have”]. But then you say “will” instead of “would” makes more sense to you. … … … … / … … … … This is where Susan’s answer comes in to play. You suggest “… a man accustomed to shabbiness will be ashamed to be seen in the street in such rags.” This construction is complicated a little by the fact that the subject of the clause is hypothetical -- not “John” or “Paul”, but “a [hypothetical] man accustomed to shabbiness”. But I’m not sure that that’s important. …(continued)…
    – Scott - Слава Україні
    Dec 7, 2013 at 1:09
  • …(continuation)… Your phrasing suggests that this hypothetical man will be seen in the street in such rags and consequently will be ashamed. But we have no reason to believe that such events will happen. Rather, (as Susan explains) the statement is that if this person were seen in the street in such rags, then (the author speculates) he (the hypothetical man) would be ashamed.
    – Scott - Слава Україні
    Dec 7, 2013 at 1:10
  • When I said that "would" made sense, I was referring to the original sentences, which are written in past tense. Then, since "will" is the present tense of "would", if the book were written in present tense, then I felt "will" would make sense. But it doesn't matter because I think you and Susan have explained very well why a subjunctive statement is necessarily used here, and why "will"(in present tense) and "would"(in past tense) are not suitable. I've been persuaded, and I appreciate both of your answers. :)
    – JJcat
    Dec 7, 2013 at 11:40
1

In these sentences, they are using the past perfect with the conditional, that is, it hasn't actually happened, but if it had, this is how they would have felt. Their feelings are based on the condition of their being there.

It is, indeed, a speculative mood that the author is aiming for.

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.