19 Comments
Sorry for the question, English is not my first language, but "he will have called" doesn't make any sense to me. "He would have called" would, instead. Can anyone clarify for me please?
837
This is the future perfect, it's the tense used to describe future events as seen from a point even further into the future.
Let's say he will call tomorrow. Next week, that will be an event in the past, and then 'he will have called'.
I believe this is a wrong explanation, and it's not how this tense is used in both languages.
If I may add my two cents:
What Arnauti is saying seems very wrong to me, because next week, tomorrow's event (which would already be in the past), would just be described by using the form: "He called (the next day)".
But the tense we are learning here is used when we're talking about two events in the future, where one precedes the other, and the order is important.
i.e. "I am going to the bank tomorrow at 11 AM, by which time my daughter will have called them to inform them that I am coming".
This is the right use of the tense.
I hope this helps.
- 837
What I meant was like this – let me show it as a timeline.
- today, when I'm speaking
- tomorrow, he calls
- next week, he has called
So I'm talking (today, at point 1) about a future event, 2, as seen from a point even further into the future, 3.
I think what you're saying is just another way of describing the same thing, but this is a bit tricky, so having more than one explanation can be very helpful.
Dear Arnauti you are right but usually in english language when they use future perfect, they clearly have two different verbs but in swedish expretions there are only one verb
And of course i think the first verb must be shown finished before the second verb takes place
Hope this helps, i would typically use this sentence when trying to reassure a person in a few situations. For instance, say my daughter wanted tickets to a concert and was unable to call and was relying on a friend. She may be worried that the friend had forgotten and i would say "He will have called, dont worry". Hope this helps to put this sentance into some context.
Ok, I did some searches, and maybe I can help Portuguese speakers: this seems to be futuro do presente composto do indicativo:
Ele ligará. (simples) => Ele terá ligado (composto)
It's a verb tense that is seldom used at least in Brazilian Portuguese (we tend to use the simple future), but maybe you try to recall it from the 8th/9th grades at school... ;)
Something simmilar might apply to other languages as well...
Why is this "ringt"? Googling just tells me it's a "supine" and I have no clue what a supine is.
Supine is the form you used to form the perfect tense. The perfect tense is e.g. English have sung, have taken, that are different from sang and took. In English, the past tense and the perfect tense are often identical, as in called and have called, but they’re always different in Swedish. So ’called, rang’ is ringde whereas ’have called, have rung’ is har ringt.
Oh thanks, that helps a lot as well as helping me find what lesson it came under to read to notes.
Is Kommer att one of those things i just have to put in my mind somewhere? it seems it means both ''is going to & will have'' depending on what you are trying to say in the sentence. Kommer att ha - Is going to have? Kommer att - is going to then Kommer att ha - will have?
- kommer att = will, or is going to
- ha = have
- kommer att ha = will have, or is going to have
Does that make it clearer?
Why is "rang" not acceptable? "He will have rang" is a sentence I've used before in (NZ) Englishj
Because "rang" is the past tense. We even have an entry on that in the FAQ. :)
https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/20444477/FAQ-for-the-Swedish-course
