"could have" 用得對嗎

cow

Hong Kong-based Michel Lowy, 45, fell off a mountainside along the Tei Tong Tsai Country Trail when he was running downhill at 11.30am.

His fall was broken by tree branches, witnesses said, which could have saved him from more serious injuries.
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/ne ... ype=3&pp_cat=31

Unclejt

Okay 噃。「好彩有樹枝頂住，唔係可能傷得更嚴重。」

SorTo

回覆 cow 的帖子

Nothing wrong with the original sentences.

cow

in bbc.co

As with would have, and should have, could have is used to talk about the past and refers to things that people could have done in the past, but didn't attempt to do or succeed in doing:
• I could have gone to university, if I'd passed my exams.
• If he'd trained harder, I'm sure he could have completed the swim.

既然有樹枝頂住, 是否不應該用would have, should have 同 could have? 我覺得可以用might have. 但要加強"save him from more serious injuries的可能. 我會用might probably have.

talknwrite

如果'which'係指'tree branches', 用could have 會怪, 因為事實係 the tree branches saved him from more serious injuries. 除非想表達no tree branches, 都未必會有 more serious injuries. 有D九唔答八

如果'which'係指'His fall' , 無理由會saved him.
如果'which'係指整件事'His fall was broken by tree branches,' 好難明解 怎樣 could have saved him.
我估個記者係想講his fall could have caused him more serious injuries.

Cheeselover

但我看到的事是＂他跌倒，是因於樹枝折斷＂。could have +pp 用於一過去一事，欲做但沒有做，多少有點悔不當初，樓主可能跟我一樣懷疑，既然樹枝折斷令致受傷，它又怎樣令傷者沒有更嚴重的受傷？

至於Which是指樹枝還是整件事情，我感覺是前者，不過若句子含糊不清，引致讀者誤會，不如重寫。

shadeslayer

talknwrite 發表於 15-10-6 00:28
如果'which'係指'tree branches', 用could have 會怪, 因為事實係 the tree branches saved him from more  ...

Which 一定係指 tree branches. Could have saved 只是表達「可能」，不是絕對，sounds alright.

Cheeselover

原帖由 Cheeselover 於 15-10-06 發表
但我看到的事是＂他跌倒，是因於樹枝折斷＂。could have +pp 用於一過去一事，欲做但沒有做，多少有點悔不 ...

更正：不應該是＂悔不當初＂，較貼切的應該是＂馬後砲＂，有早知無乞兒的味道。