0

Please consider the following. Supposing the context is such that the frame was never stolen, is it acceptable to use "could have been stolen" instead of "could be stolen"? What would be the difference?

The original frame, which was made of gold, was replaced with a marble one before it could have been stolen

tchrist
  • 134,759
Apollyon
  • 1,879

1 Answers1

1

First off let's look at your two options:

"could be stolen" if you look at the be here you can see that it's emphasizing what might happen in the future.

"could have been stolen" if you look at the have been you can see that what is being emphasized is what could have already happened, in the past.

so your sentence: The original frame, which was made of gold, was replaced with a marble one before it could have been stolen

basically means: before it even had the opportunity of being stolen, the frame was replaced.

Mou某
  • 5,377
  • The original frame, which was made of gold, was replaced with a marble one before it could be stolen also means the frame was replaced before it had the opportunity of being stolen – Henry Jul 05 '14 at 15:03
  • @Henry What do you think is the difference? – Apollyon Jul 05 '14 at 15:55
  • @ I suspect that the 'could have been' version implies that the coins were not made in the end, whereas the 'could be' version does not imply that. What do you think? – Apollyon Jul 05 '14 at 15:56