1

I have to analyse these two sentences:

He must have had a business meeting the next morning.

He must have had a lot of money because the furniture looked expensive.

The verb “must have had” is used in the same tense in these two sentences? It seems to me that in the first it is future in the past and in the second past. Is it right?

closed as off-topic by Andrew, user3169, M.A.R. ಠ_ಠ, Davo, Varun Nair Jan 9 at 13:10

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question should include more details than have been provided here. Please edit to add the research you have done in your efforts to answer the question, or provide more context. See: Details, Please." – Andrew, user3169, M.A.R. ಠ_ಠ, Davo, Varun Nair
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • What do you think? Please add more detail to your question to explain why this is confusing for you. – Andrew Jan 5 at 17:11
  • 1
    Grammatically they're the same, but note that in your first example to have has the sense of to experience, to undergo (as in He has a cold), but in the second it's more specifically to own, to possess (as in He has a car). Also note that you could simplify both examples by discarding had - the switch from Present Prefect to Simple Present doesn't affect the part you're concerned with, so it's really just irrelevant and confusing. – FumbleFingers Jan 5 at 17:17
0

Regarding the first sentence, we often use the present tense to refer to things in the future in English. I would say "I have a business meeting tomorrow" instead of "I will have a business meeting tomorrow" (which sounds a little unnatural). The same applies here.
As for the second, I do believe that it is in past. It's just identical to the present because "must had had" and "must have had had" make no sense whatsoever.
I could be wrong on this, though.

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