1

Consider the following text:

"There are many beautiful hills and country parks in Hong Kong that I want to hike, but it's too hot right now. I would rather wait until the fall. What a pity! Hong Kong ___ a hiking paradise if not for the weather."

Should I use "would be" or "would've been" in the blank? Why?

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    Hong Kong will still be a hiking paradise in fall, so why not stick with "would be"?
    – BillJ
    Commented Jul 23, 2023 at 9:22
  • 1
    [a] << Hong Kong would be a hiking paradise if not for the weather >> states (subjectively) an enduring fact. The weather regularly mars things. // [b] << Hong Kong would have been a hiking paradise if not for the weather >> refers (here) to the present season's weather being the spoiler, essentially preventing the desired (now; this summer) hiking from being a reality; this might or might not be a recurring problem. // You must choose which applies; neither is ungrammatical.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Jul 23, 2023 at 9:46
  • Ashworth's comment is the best answer here, it should be promoted to an actual answer.
    – BadZen
    Commented Jul 25, 2023 at 2:05

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

As commented, both versions are perfectly grammatical.

1: Hong Kong would be a hiking paradise if not for the weather.

Implies either 1a ...would be right now OR 1b ...would be all the time That's to say, only context determines whether it's the current weather that prevents it being a hiking paradise, or that it's never a hiking paradise because of the weather all year round.

2: Hong Kong would have been a hiking paradise if not for the weather.

Implies either 2a ...would have been in the speaker's recent past (i.e. - during his currently ending holiday in HK) OR 2b ...in some hypothetical alternate reality [where HK has different weather].

If speaker is specifically expressing current regret that he couldn't go hiking very recently, option #2 is probably best (because Present Perfect implies strong connection to time of speaking). In all other contexts, I'd suggest sticking with option #1.

Improve this answer
1

Although both tenses are grammatical here, the present seems to fit better, and it would be difficult to pin down the meaning of the perfect version.

would be implies "would now be".

would have been could imply that it would now be, and would long have enjoyed a reputation for being, a hiking paradise. Its status as hiking paradise would be well-established.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .