1

In this post:

Let’s be frank: If Trump had Russian business deals and was lying, he, just like former national security adviser Michael Flynn, would be compromised; the Russians would know what he is saying is not true and they would therefore have leverage over the president of the United States. That’s quite apart from whether Trump might have felt financial pressure or incentive to treat the Russians more gently than he otherwise would.

Should it be "Trump might have felt" or "Trump might feel"? Isn't the author talking about the present and the future as well? Why is past participle used there? Should it be "might feel"?

John M.
  • 133
  • It depends on whether the author is considering how he might have felt at some particular time in the past (maybe at some point where he had to make a decision) or how he feels in general. – Jim May 11 '17 at 03:55
  • @Jim But if he was considering the past, shouldn't the last part be "more gently than he otherwise would have."? Shouldn't the two verbs be symmetric? – John M. May 11 '17 at 04:50
  • It could be. It could also be than he otherwise would have done. – Jim May 11 '17 at 04:52
  • @Jim So does that mean it should have either been "..Trump might feel... than he otherwise would." or ".. Trump might have felt... than he otherwise would have."? If so, does the asymmetry proves the tense in the original statement wrong? – John M. May 11 '17 at 04:54
  • The would could be a reference to his normal/typical pattern of treatment and not necessarily to how he would have treated them at some particular time. – Jim May 11 '17 at 04:59
  • It’s also not about his feeling it’s about his treatment. “... To treat ... more gently than he otherwise would treat them.” – Jim May 11 '17 at 05:02
  • It's a complex logical argument. The tenses are fine. – aparente001 May 11 '17 at 07:12
  • Since the author used "might have felt", shouldn't the end of the sentence be "he otherwise would have"? Shouldn't they be symmetrical? – John M. Jun 15 '17 at 12:20

0 Answers0