[文法] 沒有條件下的 would have p.p.

看板Eng-Class作者 (JakovFella)時間7年前 (2017/04/05 23:05), 編輯推噓2(2推 0噓 18→)
留言20則, 6人參與, 最新討論串1/1
這句來自於 美劇 The Big Bang Theory S08E16 一段對話: A: Today's your birthday? B: Yes. ......中間有其他對話...... A: That is so funny. I never would have pegged you for a Pisces. 沒有條件下我就不懂為什麼用 would've pp 可以改用像下面兩句嗎? I never have pegged you for a Pisces. I never pegged you for a Pisces. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 61.231.241.194 ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Eng-Class/M.1491404702.A.D91.html
推
04/05 23:46, , 1F
感覺跟中間對話內容有關
04/05 23:46, 1F
→
04/06 00:14, , 2F
"條件"？像是"if"這種字眼？ would've pp 的使用和 if 這
04/06 00:14, 2F
→
04/06 00:16, , 3F
類字眼兩者間沒有絕對的關係。文法書這樣子教的只是一個
04/06 00:16, 3F
→
04/06 00:17, , 4F
基本介紹，不要誤解成句型一定要跟文法書上教的100%完全
04/06 00:17, 4F
→
04/06 00:17, , 5F
一樣才行。if這類字眼只是常和would've pp搭配的用字（之
04/06 00:17, 5F
→
04/06 00:17, , 6F
一）而已。
04/06 00:17, 6F
→
04/06 00:17, , 7F
"可以改用...?"-> No. 意思變了。比如你改的句1變成一種
04/06 00:17, 7F
→
04/06 00:17, , 8F
事實陳述 -- 他確實沒有(過去到現在，也含現在沒有)，但
04/06 00:17, 8F
→
04/06 00:17, , 9F
是他已經知道他是 Pisces，所以這"事實陳述"無法成立
04/06 00:17, 9F
→
04/06 00:17, , 10F
04/06 00:17, 10F
→
04/06 00:18, , 11F
-> 2 ... 注意看開頭的橘底字。然後看例句。if這類字眼不
04/06 00:18, 11F
→
04/06 00:18, , 12F
是一定要
04/06 00:18, 12F
→
04/06 00:43, , 13F
可想成有隱藏的if > (如果要我猜的話)我絕不會猜你是
04/06 00:43, 13F
→
04/06 00:43, , 14F
雙魚座
04/06 00:43, 14F
→
04/06 02:09, , 15F
would = 會
04/06 02:09, 15F
→
04/06 02:10, , 16F
I never would have pegged …… = 絕對不會(猜到)……
04/06 02:10, 16F
→
04/06 02:10, , 17F
I have never pegged …… = 我從來沒有(認為)……
04/06 02:10, 17F
→
04/07 10:16, , 18F
感謝大大解答，所以跟will have pp 有關係只是變成假設
04/07 10:16, 18F
→
04/07 10:16, , 19F
，對吧?
04/07 10:16, 19F
推
04/07 12:42, , 20F
條件就是前面的一堆劇情（認真）
04/07 12:42, 20F
‣ 更多 f3505413 的文章
文章代碼(AID): #1OvGUUsH (Eng-Class)