...by the end of this month it would <have been><be> his twenty years of work...

JJXR

Senior Member
Russian
Hello to all,

Thanks for reading my post.


Sample sentences:

1. As you probably know, he's an old teacher. If they hadn't made the decision to fire old teachers, and if they were not to fire him tomorrow, then by the end of this month it would have been his twenty years of work at that school since he started teaching there.

2. As you probably know, he's an old teacher. Suppose they were to fire some old teachers tomorrow. If they were not to fire him, then by the end of this month it would be his twenty years of work at that school since he started teaching there. If they were to fire him, it wouldn't be.

Question:

In sentence #1, it would be incorrect to use be instead of have been, whereas, in sentence #2, it would be incorrect to use have been instead of be. Is this correct?


Thanks a lot for any comments, corrections or suggestions!

Regards,
JJXR
 
  • london calling

    Senior Member
    UK English
    The use of the past conditional (sentence 1.) is correct, but the way you have expressed it is decidedly unnatural.:)

    If they hadn't made the decision to fire old teachers - Omissis - then by the end of this month it would have been his twenty years of work since he had started teaching there/at that school.
     

    JJXR

    Senior Member
    Russian
    A classic third conditional sentence: would have + past participle and past perfect.
    I know this pattern: If + past perfect ... would have + past participle, but in this pattern the past perfect is used after the word "if", and you used it after the word "since". I don't understand why. :confused:
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    Omissis is a word I have never seen before. The OED does not list it.
    It seems to have been borrowed from Italian.
    Omissis, when talking about audit reports
    I am still not sure why you insist on using “since he started” - that clock is still ticking and won’t stop even if he is fired:) Then, if we rewrite, it is not needed, since the “twenty years” has an obvious start date.
    1. As you probably know, he's an old teacher. If they hadn't made the decision to fire old teachers, and if they were not to fire him tomorrow, then by the end of this month it would have been his he will have completed twenty years of work (teaching) at that school since he started teaching there.

    2. As you probably know, he's an old teacher. Suppose they were to fire some old teachers tomorrow. If they were not to fire him, then by the end of this month he would it would be complete his twentieth year of work teaching at that school since he started teaching there. If they were to fire him, it wouldn't be.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top