-1

Please provide your comments regarding my interpretations for each example.

The first example:

Speaker A: Do you know he was killed by a knife?

Speaker B: Oh really!! I thought he was killed by a baseball bat.

Interpretation: Speaker B was at the scene the moment the murder happened and witnessed the murder.

The second example:

Speaker A: Do you know that Mr. Jackson died in an accident?

Speaker B: Oh really!!I thought he had been murdered by a thief.

Interpretation: Speaker B wasn't at the scene and he got the false news later.

The reason for my second interpretation is that first something must happen before we can think of it and based on past perfect,the first action is past perfect and the second is simple past.

Is the verb think considered a second action??

And another issue, Which of the speaker B's reactions are right?

Speaker A: Do you know Einstein was a gay?

Speaker B1:Really! I thought he was a straight.

B2:Really! I thought he had been a straight .

B3:Really! I would have thought he had been a straight

B.4:Really!I would have thought he was a straight.

Above,What is the difference between thought and would have thought ? Is 'would have thought' used for the past to show that the information wasn't something that mattered to us and we didn't think about it?is it continuing of if it had occurred to me I would have thought....?

My last issue,regarding the third conditional which of the examples are true?

Let's suppose a friend of yours hadn't helped an old man cross a street yesterday, and you'd like to express your opinion. Which one would you say:1.If I were you I would have helped that old man.

2.If I had been you I would have helped that old man.

I would be extremely grateful if you answered my questions.

1

First example: B's response indicates that he was not a witness. Otherwise, his response would be: "No, he was killed by a baseball bat." Second example: B's response indicates that he was not a witness. Both responses are grammatically correct. The first indicates that B thought a particular fact was true; the second indicates that B thought a particular had happened. It is a subtle difference that, depending on the context, would not likely be noticed by many listeners or readers--again, because both are grammatically correct and both are true. The Einstein issue: "I thought he was a straight" is correct: it indicates that B thought a particular claim represented a general truth. "I would have thought he was a straight" is also correct, to indicate that, if B had thought about this issue at all, he would have thought Eistein was straight. The difference between the two is simply that, in the former, B thought something; in the second, B is indicating that he had no opinion at all, but would have assumed Einstein was straight IF he had been prompted to think about it. Lastly, both sentences about the old man work, the first to mean that, if I were you at any time (now or in the past), I would have helped, the second to indicate that, if I had been you at the time I saw that old man, I would have helped him. Both are true, both are grammatically correct, BUT IMO you'd more likely hear the first than the second. It's easier, shorter, and more colloquial.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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