souvik101990 wrote:
A cricketer trying to predict the outcome of the one day world cup match in 1996 between the experienced Pakistan and the upstart Bangladesh, probably would have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
A. have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
B. have chosen that it would be the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and be quite wrong
C. choose the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
D. choose the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and be quite wrong
E. choose in favor of the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
Hi,
would Vs would have...
Here 'would have ' is appropriate...
'would have' is a past modal verbs used hypothetically, to talk about things that didn't really happen in the past...
the cricketer would have done the act of thinking of future/outcome of the game prior to start of the game..
so A and B are left..
Both do not seem to be perfect or even very close to being correct..
A. have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong...
here the flaw..
i) been is parallel to chosen...
so the sentence reads.. a cricketer would have chosen.... and been quite wrong......
I think the cricketer would be wrong only after he has chosen but the sentence shows the simultaenous and independent activities..
A. have chosen the then invincible Pakistan by an odds of 10/1 and been quite wrong
i) use of ambiguous 'it'
ii) same as in A..
the main flaw is .. "probabily he would have chosen..... but he cannot
"probabily be quite wrong" because the event is up and we know he is wrong...."
the sentence could have been better if written...
A cricketer.............................., would have probabily chosen ..... and would have quite wrong by doing so. _________________