Conversation started Jul 8, 2014 at 18:29.
user116848
Jul 8, 2014 18:29
I don't get this line's grammar: "Who knows? We might've been different people. We might've been happy". Why not "we might be"? Here is the script script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/c/…
user116848
Because talking about "now", right? So why not "would be" or "might be" ?
might've been is used when it is not (whatever they wish for).
user116848
I watched this movie a long time ago. Just remembered this line, so I asked.
Anonymous
To me, it sounds like it's talking about the period of time beginning with the betrayal continuing forward to the present
user116848
So if I say "Who knows? We would be different people. We would be happy"
user116848
Jul 8, 2014 18:32
That would be correct too? Yes?
Anonymous
You appear to be contradicting yourself
Anonymous
"Who knows" = I don't know. "We would be happy" = I am fairly certain.
user116848
So "who knows" must follow "might have been" type structure?
@snailboat I am most decidedly not going to defend a fallacy I would much rather see confined to the depths of hell than endlessly repeated for the supposed benefit of generations of unsuspecting learners! Please do not confuse my mere observation with a willingness to defend any such phenomenon!
Anonymous
@Arrowfar "Who knows?" indicates uncertainty. It is strange to follow it with a statement of relative certainty
user116848
Jul 8, 2014 18:36
I see
Anonymous
Might seems okay. Would seems less okay.
user116848
Now it makes sense. After all those years. I always thought it was a bad grammar.
user116848
I am bookmarking your answer. :)
Anonymous
It's common to talk about what might have been, if only someone had made a different decision, if only things had been different
would have been is possible, though.
user116848
Jul 8, 2014 18:39
hmm
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Sure, the only reason would have been is strange in the example above is because it contradicts what was just said
I haven't read the script.
 
Conversation ended Jul 8, 2014 at 18:41.