What is the difference in the meaning between following sentences:
- John was to have picked strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
- John was to pick strawberries yesterday but the downpour made the field too muddy.
(Source: modified example from BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv103.shtml)
I've read in Learn English BBC that the form "was to" and "was to have" is used for past plan which wasn't fulfilled. But what I haven't understood is that these forms look similar to me. I'm in a dilemma which one (was to, or was to have) is used for past and which one is for unfullfilled past.
So, what are the differences between the constructions
- was/were to + infinitive
- was/were to have + past participle?
Does it mean 'was to+infinitive' is used for fixed plan in the past which either did happen or didn't happen, so, the further justification is needed to know this.
On the other hand, 'was to have+p.p is a construction which itself implies that the fixed plan(sheduled in the pas) in the past didn't happen? Please make it clear with examples ? I would appreciate your helpfull answer.