People often use contractions when speaking and it's fine. But if you had to write a formal letter you would use "...I had had..." instead of '"...I'd had...".Quote:
Originally Posted by Seventh-Monkey
Printable View
People often use contractions when speaking and it's fine. But if you had to write a formal letter you would use "...I had had..." instead of '"...I'd had...".Quote:
Originally Posted by Seventh-Monkey
Oh, definitely, I'm just not sure about mixing "I wouldn't have got" and "I had".Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderkat
Is it because of the tenses or the verbs themselves?
Is it better this way "I wouldn't have gotten wet if I'd worn my raincoat"?
[quote=Seventh-Monkey]Oh, definitely, I'm just not sure about mixing "I wouldn't have got" and "I had".[/quote:3uub1l9m]Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderkat
I am not even 100% about it either. But all I know is:
"I would have got" and "I had" are mismatched tenses:
"I would have got" corresponds to "I had had"
"I'd had" is fine, since I'd = I had (in this context)
See, in your example there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderkat
I had worn a raincoat
I had had my umbrealla
It supports my daying the second part should be "I had had my umbrella", and not "I had my umbrella".
But:
I wouldn't have gotten wet if I wore my raincoat
Can mean "I never wear my raincoat, but if I did wear my raincoat, I wouldn't have gotten wet when it was raining".
It depends when everything is going on.
I was just trying to make the sentence less weird to Seventh-Monkey by changing the words, even if it does supports your examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by TATY
I would say the first one is more an hypothetical situation in its meaning than the second one.
I reckon so, and I'd interpret that as a one-off occasion unless otherwise informed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderkat