1

Possible Duplicate:
“Would have had to have been” vs “would have had to be” for past event conditions

What's the difference in meaning between these phrases?

would've had to jump
would've had to have jumped

As far as I understand, they both describe an unreal situation in the past, but I can't figure out the difference.

Community
  • 1
Gebb
  • 113
  • 4
  • @BarrieEngland, I agree, it is a duplicate. What should I do with my question? – Gebb Dec 02 '11 at 08:25
  • @Gebb: You don't have to do anything. The question will remain open unless others agree that it should be closed. It's a good question, but it's best if answers to it are all given in the same place. – Barrie England Dec 02 '11 at 08:46
  • @Gebb You can vote to close it too. The OPs are always able to vote to close their own questions. – apaderno Dec 06 '11 at 14:35

1 Answers1

1

The first describes an unreal situation in the past.

I would have had to jump to have made it across the chasm.

The second describes an unreal situation in the past, that is also prior to some other (unreal) situation in the past.

I would have had to have jumped across the chasm in order to have seen the hidden valley.

Hellion
  • 59,365
  • Your both examples describe a situation and a subsequent situation. Or am I missing something? – Gebb Dec 02 '11 at 05:57
  • It's actually "a situation and a subsequent situation" prior to the present. That is, the subsequent situation is not the present. So, the second statement implies a reference to a third interim point of time between the past of the first statement and the present. – Kris Dec 02 '11 at 13:01