0
  1. Jane is keen to point out that none of this would have been possible without the dedication of the entire team.
  2. Jane is keen to point out that none of this is possible without the dedication of the entire team.
  3. Jane is keen to point out that none of this has been possible without the dedication of the entire team.

Jane wants to express her appreciation for the hard work of everyone involved in a project. In this context, which one above should I use?

1
  1. Jane is keen to point out that none of this would have been possible without the dedication of the entire team.

  2. Jane is keen to point out that none of this is possible without the dedication of the entire team.

  3. Jane is keen to point out that none of this has been possible without the dedication of the entire team.

The first construction is correct for your context, but all three would be grammatically correct in some other context.

The first construction implies the team's dedication has already occurred, because whatever "this" is must be possible. Otherwise, it wouldn't make sense to comment that it would not have been possible under different circumstances. The thing that is possible may or may not have actually occurred yet, and the team could even have ultimately failed, as long as the dedication allowed the possibility of success. (For example, perhaps they made it to a championship sports match with the possibility of winning first place, which would not have been possible without dedication, but they did not end up taking first place.)

The second construction implies that something is currently possible but has not yet occurred. That possibility will become an impossibility without the dedication of the team.

The third construction implies that whatever Jane is talking about has not been possible, and the team's lack of dedication is the reason that it was not possible.

| improve this answer | |
  • Can we say "this would not be possible without the dedication of the entire team" ? How is it different from "this would not have been possible without the dedication of the entire team" – Mike Philip Jan 30 '19 at 4:33
  • 1
    @MikePhilip You can say either, and they probably mean the same thing. Technically, "this would not be possible" is describing whether something is currently possible, while "this would not have been possible" is describing something that was made possible at some point in the past. However, this difference is inconsequential in most contexts. Perhaps the thing was made possible in the past, and perhaps it was made possible now, but the point of both sentences is to show that the thing is now happening because of the team's dedication. – Tashus Jan 30 '19 at 15:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.