Someone asked me what if horse had two legs how would it be look like?

I replied if horse had two legs then it would have been looked like same as you.

I just want to know in that reply am I grammatically correct or not?

  • Please add more detail to explain what specifically is the confusing grammar? Otherwise this question will be closed as "proofreading".
    – Andrew
    Dec 22 '17 at 17:07
  • it would have been looked like same as you is syntactic garbage on many levels. Dec 22 '17 at 18:00
  • The verb look is not transitive in the sense of "appear", and so you're forming an invalid passive construction with have been looked. Dec 22 '17 at 19:42

No, it is not correct.

Whenever you use continuous tenses, such as the present continuous (is looking), the past continuous (was looking), and the past perfect continuous (had been looking), a gerund is always required.

Instead, in replies like this, the present conditional is the best option:

If a horse had two legs, it would look the same as you.

  • But what if I said "would have been looked like" what would it signifies?
    – fusion
    Dec 23 '17 at 13:56
  • @fusion have been looked does not exist as a verb tense because you're combining a past participle (looked) with continuous tenses that require a gerund (looking).
    – Kman3
    Dec 24 '17 at 18:50

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