10 mistakes

[Andriana]

Here is a passage that contains 10 mistakes. I’ve underlined the errors and corrected them between parentheses, but I am not sure of my corrections. I would be very grateful if you could help me pointing out the mistakes and explaining the grammatical rule.

This has been one of those days when I wish I would have stayed (had stayed) in bed. It started at 7:30 this morning when Eman called me up and asked for “a little favour.” She’s always asking me to do things for her and never wants to take any responsibility for herself. She acts as if the world owe (owes) her a living. I wish she won’t (wouldn’t) do that. Today she wanted me to take her to the mall because she had to get her mother a birthday present. I told her I had to be downtown at ten A.M for a job interview, and she said it wouldn’t take long to drive to the mall and I’d have plenty of time to get downtown. I gave in and agreed to take her; but something told me I shouldn’t (shouldn’t have). If I would have listened (had listened) to my inner voice, I might had (might have) a job today. When we were on the freeway, there was a major accident, and traffic was tied up for over an hour. By the time we got to the mall, it was ten-thirty, so I missed my job interview. I think I probably would get (would have got/gotten) the job if I would have managed (had managed) to make it to the interview because my qualifications are good. If only I would have listened (hadn’t listened) to Trudy! I just hope she never asked (will never ask) me to do something like this again, and if she does, I hope I didn’t agree (won’t agree).

[Temico]

I am only a student but allow me to give it a try.

"This has been one of those days when I wish I would have stayed (had stayed) in bed. It started at 7:30 this morning when Eman called me up and asked for “a little favour.” She’s always asking me to do things for her and never wants to take any responsibility for herself. She acts as if the world owe (owes) her a living. I wish she won’t (wouldn’t) do that. Today she wanted me to take her to the mall because she had to get her mother a birthday present. I told her I had to be downtown at ten A.M(10a.m.) for a job interview, and she said it wouldn’t take long to drive to the mall and I’d have plenty of time to get downtown. I gave in and agreed to take her; but something told me I shouldn’t (shouldn’t have done so). If I would have listened (had listened) to my inner voice, I might had (might have had) a job today. When we were on the freeway, there was a major accident, and traffic was tied up for over an hour. By the time we got to the mall, it was ten-thirty, so I missed my job interview. I think I probably would get (would have got/gotten) the job if I would have managed (had managed) to make it to the interview because my qualifications are(were) good. If only I would have listened (hadn’t listened) to Trudy(Eman?)! I just hope she never asked (never asks) me to do something like this again, and if she does, I hope I didn’t agree (don’t agree)."

[Pete]

Hi Andriana -- you wrote me off line to ask if I would look at this question. I try to look at all the questions and answers, and if I think I have something to add, I certainly will. Temico's comments here are the same as I would have made.

By the way, thanks, Temico (and others). It's much easier to help here when lots of people do it.

[Andriana]

Temico, thanks a lot for having a bash at correcting the mistakes. You actually changed some answers that were already correct. That is why I asked Moderator Pete to look at them. I just wanted to double-check. Now Pete's approval of the incorrect changes you made threw me off balance!


Let us look at your answers again:


1.
You changed (ten A.M) to (10 a.m). I don't think you need to change this. Both formats are correct and acceptable. Why change it?



2. [ I gave in and agreed to take her, but something told me I shouldn't ] You changed (I shouldn't) to (I shouldn't have done so). The part done so is redundant. It adds no meaning to the sentence. I shouldn't have can stand alone and suggests the same meaning as I shouldn't have given in and agreed OR I shouldn't have done so. I can see Pete is nodding! Ain't you Pete?


3. [ if I had listened to my inner voice, I might had a job today] You changed (might had) to (might have had). Grammatically speaking, you are completely right. Neither of the events the speaker is talking about, did take place in the past. In such case, the past perfect is used in both clauses ( with Modals would/could/might + have + past participle) in the result clause. However, in some cases, the tense used in the main (result) clause depends on the result itself. If the result was in the past ( the speaker is referring to a situation or event that didn't actually happen; past hypothetical result) then (could/would/might + have + past participle) must be used in the result/main clause. But if the speaker is referring to a hypothetical present or future result, then ( would/could/might + verb to) must be used. So the correct answer here is might have a job today.


4. [ I think I would have got/gotten the job if I had managed to make it to the interview because my qualifications are good]
You changed (are) to (were). I am actually not all that sure about this one. Personally I think, it depends on what the speaker meant by qualifications. If she meant her qualifications in general (her personal qualities, skills and experience), then I'd go for (are) NOT (were), because in this case her qualifications wouldn't have changed whether she had got the job or not. However, if the speaker were referring to certain qualifications that were only suitable for that job that she hadn't got, then I'd say , YES, your answer is completely right and I'd also go for (were).
Do you agree with me Pete?


5. Now, my last comment is on this: [ I just hope she never asks me to do something like this again, and if she does, I hope I didn't agree]
You changed 'I hope [I]I didn't agree' to 'I hope I don't agree'. My answer was 'I hope I won't agree.' Again, grammatically speaking, the verb hope is similar to future (predictive) conditionals in that the same clauses that follow hope can also function either as the if clause or the result clause of a future conditional. For example:


- I hope (that) * Pete is nodding
- I hope (that) * Pete agrees with my analysis


If Pete is nodding, he agrees with my analysis


Another example:


- I hope (that) * Pete reads my comments
- I hope (that) * Pete will agree with me


If Pete reads my comments, he will agree with me


You can see from the two examples above that both the simple present and future ( he agrees/will agree ) can follow the verb hope. Both suggest the same meaning and you can use either of them. So either forms (I hope I don't agree/I won't agree) could be used here. What do you think, Pete?



Andriana

[Pete]

Temico, thanks a lot for having a bash at correcting the mistakes. You actually changed some answers that were already correct. That is why I asked Moderator Pete to look at them. I just wanted to double-check. Now Pete's approval of the incorrect changes you made threw me off balance!

-- When I looked at Temico's reply, I was trying to see if there were any sentences that appeared wrong; I'll admit I did not check to see whether the original sentences required the suggested change. (I'll make my comments here in "blue".) -- Pete

Let us look at your answers again:


1.
You changed (ten A.M) to (10 a.m). I don't think you need to change this. Both formats are correct and acceptable. Why change it?

-- My guess is that Temico is suggesting a personal preference; I think I see lower case much more often with this abbreviation.

2. [ I gave in and agreed to take her, but something told me I shouldn't ] You changed (I shouldn't) to (I shouldn't have done so). The part done so is redundant. It adds no meaning to the sentence. I shouldn't have can stand alone and suggests the same meaning as I shouldn't have given in and agreed OR I shouldn't have done so. I can see Pete is nodding! Ain't you Pete?

-- You are correct that both forms are correct and there is no difference in meaning. I imagine that Temico is suggesting that leaving fewer words to be "understood" will make the sentence less likely to be misinterpreted, especially by people who are not very fluent in English.

3. [ if I had listened to my inner voice, I might had a job today] You changed (might had) to (might have had). Grammatically speaking, you are completely right. Neither of the events the speaker is talking about, did take place in the past. In such case, the past perfect is used in both clauses ( with Modals would/could/might + have + past participle) in the result clause. However, in some cases, the tense used in the main (result) clause depends on the result itself. If the result was in the past ( the speaker is referring to a situation or event that didn't actually happen; past hypothetical result) then (could/would/might + have + past participle) must be used in the result/main clause. But if the speaker is referring to a hypothetical present or future result, then ( would/could/might + verb to) must be used. So the correct answer here is might have a job today.

-- I missed this one. Since it is referring to a present possibility, "… I might have a job today" is the appropriate response.

4. [ I think I would have got/gotten the job if I had managed to make it to the interview because my qualifications are good]
You changed (are) to (were). I am actually not all that sure about this one. Personally I think, it depends on what the speaker meant by qualifications. If she meant her qualifications in general (her personal qualities, skills and experience), then I'd go for (are) NOT (were), because in this case her qualifications wouldn't have changed whether she had got the job or not. However, if the speaker were referring to certain qualifications that were only suitable for that job that she hadn't got, then I'd say , YES, your answer is completely right and I'd also go for (were).
Do you agree with me Pete?

-- Either tense can be used here. The difference is one of emphasis. Use "were" (past tense) to emphasize the time of the interview and why you think it would have been successful. Use "are" (present tense) to emphasize the good qualifications, both at the time of the interview and now as well.

5. Now, my last comment is on this: [ I just hope she never asks me to do something like this again, and if she does, I hope I didn't agree]
You changed 'I hope [I]I didn't agree' to 'I hope I don't agree'. My answer was 'I hope I won't agree.' Again, grammatically speaking, the verb hope is similar to future (predictive) conditionals in that the same clauses that follow hope can also function either as the if clause or the result clause of a future conditional. For example:


- I hope (that) * Pete is nodding
- I hope (that) * Pete agrees with my analysis


If Pete is nodding, he agrees with my analysis


Another example:


- I hope (that) * Pete reads my comments
- I hope (that) * Pete will agree with me


If Pete reads my comments, he will agree with me


You can see from the two examples above that both the simple present and future ( he agrees/will agree ) can follow the verb hope. Both suggest the same meaning and you can use either of them. So either forms (I hope I don't agree/I won't agree) could be used here. What do you think, Pete?

-- I do not think that "won't" is wrong here, but "don't" somehow seems more natural to me. I can't come up with a reason to insist on either possibility.

Andriana