- If he was angry, then would he have spoken to me.
- If he was angry, then he would have spoken to me.
What is the difference in meaning between these two sentences???
English Language Learners Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for speakers of other languages learning English. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
As already stated the first is a question the second a statement. However I think you will find the correct sentences should be written.
If he was angry, then would he have spoken with me.
If he was angry, then he would have spoken with me.
"with" the act of doing something together. The alternative being "at you" but then you would have more likely said "shouted at me".
Although I do not know the context in which you wish to use this sentence.
A teacher might have "spoken to you" if you had done something wrong. But that would be phrased differently. And you are extremely unlikely to say "he would have spoken with me" linked with this kind of situation.
"I have spoken to her, the subject is closed".
I have reprimanded her. I don't what to hear anything more about it.
However the following is a possibility.
He was angry, and he has spoken to me.
It was a one way street he told me and I listened. as apposed to "He was angry, and we talked about it."