-1

Barry wouldn't give up, and the woman that he married won't either.

The speaker addressing this is the subject's—Barry—spouse.

2
  • Yes, it's fine. In fact, it sounds more natural than if would were to be repeated. Normally such a saying is a general description about the first person, and a specific description about the second person who is actively engaged in something at the moment. Commented Jun 17, 2020 at 1:45
  • However, the description in the second sentence in the question is quite unnatural. Barry's wife would almost never be saying the first sentence. That would be talking about herself in the third person. That's not unheard of, but it's very uncommon. I think you meant to say the speaker is referring to the subject's spouse. Commented Jun 17, 2020 at 1:49

1 Answer 1

1

From your post:

The speaker addressing this is the subject's—Barry—spouse.

I take it that means that Barry's wife is saying that line.

Yes the two verb forms are natural, if it means this:

"Barry wouldn't give up and the woman he married (I) won't either.",

where "wouldn't" refers to the past, and "won't" refers to the present and to the future.
As pointed out in the comment below, "wouldn't" may not be real past, but hypothetical. In either case, there's no problem with moving between the verb forms.

2
  • Wouldn't can also be referring to a hypothetical: In a similar situation, Barry wouldn't give up. Although it can be used in the past tense, it's also possible that it's without tense in this sentence, despite the form of the verb. Commented Jun 17, 2020 at 3:22
  • @JasonBassford Yes, that would make sense too. Suppose that Barry had died, and his widow was reflecting on how he would have acted. Answer edited accordingly. Commented Jun 17, 2020 at 4:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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