Korean Job Discussion Forums

[raewon]

I have another question concerning the conditional. A student questioned the following sentence:

[edwardcatflap]

'must have been you' is a deduction made about the past so the speaker is saying you were the criminal at the time of the action.

'must be you' is a deduction made about the present so the speaker is saying I think you are the criminal now. They are both possible but the first one is emphasising the crime in the past to a larger extent while the second one is describing the state of being a criminal which still exists at the time of speaking.

read the English verb by Michael Lewis for some interesting ideas on the subject and Murphy or Swann for a simple breakdown

[BigLarry]

I second the poster above. If you're not sure then look at Murphy or Swan:

Murphy, R. English Grammar in Use

Swan, M. Practical English Usage.

If they're not on your shelf then you're in trouble.

[lifeinkorea]

I agree with the assumption that "you are the criminal now". However, it's not always read that way.

First, if we talk about famous people who have died we often use present tense. So, you can look at the word "criminal" in the same vein. A detective for example is trying to find who "is" the criminal, not who "was" the criminal.

"must have been the criminal" or "must have been you" puts the conversation further into the future than when the person was found to be the criminal.

This sounds strange to me too, because we usually keep records of many crimes. So, it gives me the impression it was a small crime that was forgotten. Otherwise, using the perfect tense just confuses things. I would simply say, "You were the criminal".