Here is one person's analysis of your sentence.  You have an example of a "future perfect tense" which as an "irrealis" has been back-shifted.  The present tense on "will" switches to a past tense "would" to indicate that the car in fact failed to last the amount of time predicted.  Note: "in three months the car will have lasted three months more."  "three months ago the car would have lasted three months more. (but it didn't)"  

In case the car survived we would probably use a simple tense: "three months ago the tests predicted that the car would last three months more (and it did)."  This past tense is in a subordinate clause and is back-shifted from "will last" (often called the "future tense") to agree with the past tense of the main verb "predicted."  This is why it is often misleading to call the bare infinitive with "shall/will" a future "tense."  

Bruce

>>> [log in to unmask] 04/11/01 01:19PM >>>
This is only somewhat related to the thread on verb tense.   I was asked this morning and wanted to see what others think.  How would you describe the type of verb phrase here ('would have' in particular)?

According to the diagnostic tests, your car would have lasted for what amount of time?


-larry

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html 
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/