6

Please read the following:

  1. I would like to come with you.
  2. I would have liked to come with you.
  3. I would like to have come with you.

Another example:

  1. I would prefer to drink coffee.
  2. I would have preferred to drink coffee.
  3. I would prefer to have drunk coffee.

I perfectly understand the first sentence in both the groups. What I would like to know is the difference between second and third sentences. Could you please explain that?

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    As far as I know "I would have liked to come with you" is a hypothetical sentence, e.g., If you were beautiful, I would have liked to come with you". It may also be used while telling a story when we use would as the past version of will. The 3rd version seems strange.
    – user31782
    Jan 20, 2015 at 10:09
  • 1
    @user31782 - I agree. It does seem strange. but it is used in books anyways. I am trying to understand if there is any difference.
    – Leo
    Jan 20, 2015 at 10:28
  • 4
    Please provide the excerpt where you found your example.
    – F.E.
    Jan 20, 2015 at 10:35
  • @F.E. - Actually I put this senentece into quotes and searched in google books and I got too many results. I was not reading in any particular book, but studying grammar. I tried different verbs in the same structure, still I was getting results. So I thought why would writers be using the third sentence structure over second one.
    – Leo
    Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
7

The difference is EXTREMELY subtle, but in your second example:

I would have preferred to drink coffee.

This doesn't make any assumptions about what you were doing instead of drinking coffee. "We met up to go shopping, but I would have preferred to drink coffee". "We went to a park, but I would have preferred to drink coffee."

I would prefer to have drunk coffee.

This implies that I was drinking something, but it wasn't coffee. "The lady gave me a beer, but I would prefer to have drunk coffee". "All I could find was orange juice, but I would prefer to have drunk coffee."

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    +1 but what if it was: I would have preferred to have drunk coffee?
    – Lucian Sava
    Jan 20, 2015 at 11:29
  • Sounds very strange, I don't think that's correct English.
    – Mark
    Jan 20, 2015 at 11:32
  • 2
    It is, see the following authors here
    – Lucian Sava
    Jan 20, 2015 at 11:43
  • From the article: "This phrase should invariably be followed by a present-tense infinitive–hence would have liked to go, not *would have liked to have gone, *would have liked to have read. The erroneous phrasings are very common" It's basically saying that, while not technically correct, it's commonly used by native speakers anyway. I agree with that, it sounds a bit clumsy but most native speakers don't use 100% flawless English.
    – Mark
    Jan 20, 2015 at 11:47
4

The difference between the two sentences is a matter of timing.

I would have liked to have come with you. At some time in the past I would have liked to have come with you. I may or may not have changed my mind since then.

I would like to have come with you. At this ime (now) I would like it if I had come with you. I may or may not have liked it at the time you came.

Improve this answer
0

I suppose I know the difference. Both sentences 2 and 3 indicate some unreal and hypothetical situations. The difference is that sentence 2 ( I would have liked to come with you) implies an unreal PRESENT situation, but sentence 3 (I would like to have come with you) is used to refer to a PAST unreal situation. In other words, "I would have liked to come with you" means I would NOT like to come with you now, and sentence "I would like to have come with you" means now that I think about that past occasion, I wish I had been able to come with you (I regret that I couldn't come with you). I hope it helped. 🙃

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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