# Couldn't they cast/have cast someone better looking



## Phoebe1200

Self-made.

I'm watching my favorite TV show and suddenly a new actor joins the cast, but he's not very easy on the eyes. And thinking out loud, I say such a sentence:


_*Couldn't* they* cast *someone better looking?_   or  _*Couldn't *they *have cast* someone better looking?
_

I'm in real doubt which one to use and need your help.


----------



## Franco-filly

The latter is correct as the "casting" is a past event.
If you were watching the actual filming of an episode you could use the former.


----------



## e2efour

He has already been cast, so I would use _Couldn't they have cast ...

Couldn't they cast_ is a suggestion for future activity (i.e. meaning _would it not be possible for them to cast someone else?_).
But you might also hear it said in the sense of _Were they not able to cast someone else?_


----------



## Phoebe1200

Actually in  _"Couldn't they cast someone better looking?"_ I meant "*couldn't*" in the sense of ability.


----------



## e2efour

Perhaps you should then use _Were they not able to cast someone better looking?_ to make it clear that it is not a suggestion.
I am a bit doubtful about using _Couldn't they_ in the sense of _Were they not able._


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> Actually in  _"Couldn't they cast someone better looking?"_ I meant "*couldn't*" in the sense of ability.


Are you only asking about the past or do you want them to change the casting for future episodes? We can't really tell from the form of your question.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> Are you only asking about the past?


Yes, only about the past.


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> Yes, only about the past.


Then you have your answer in posts 2 and 3.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Does it mean that both forms are acceptable to use in the OP?


----------



## JulianStuart

Franco-filly said:


> *The latter is correct* as the "casting" is a past event.
> If you were watching the actual filming of an episode you could use the former.





e2efour said:


> He has already been cast, so* I would use Couldn't they have cast ...*
> _
> Couldn't they cast_ is a suggestion for future activity (i.e. meaning _would it not be possible for them to cast someone else?_).
> But you might also hear it said in the sense of _Were they not able to cast someone else?_





Phoebe1200 said:


> Does it mean that both forms are acceptable to use in the OP?


The bold text in their posts does *not *say you can use both


----------



## Phoebe1200

Franco-filly said:


> If you were watching the actual filming of an episode you could use the former.


I don't understand this part. How does it justify the use of _"*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking?"_


----------



## JulianStuart

In your OP you said "I'm watching my favorite TV show..."
What Franco-Filly explained was for a different situation, not relevant to your situation - where the episode is being made (i.e. it is not something that is completed yet) and you are at the movie studio watching it being filmed - then it is still the present and the possibility of changing the actor still exists. _Then_ you can use the other version.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> In your OP you said "I'm watching my favorite TV show..."
> What Franco-Filly explained was for a different situation, not relevant to your situation - where the episode is being made (i.e. it is not something that is completed yet) and you are at the movie studio watching it being filmed - then it is still the present and the possibility of changing the actor still exists. _Then_ you can use the other version.


Oh, I got this part. But the problem is, like I already said, is that I mean "couldn't" in _"*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking?" _in the sense of *past ability.* And I should have mentioned it in the OP. It's just that it completely slipped my mind that it could be taken as referred to a future action when I was posting. I only realized it after I'd gotten the first two replies. 
And now it's gotten confusing for me because I still don't know if it is possible to use it in the OP or not.


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> Oh, I got this part. But the problem is, like I already said, is that I mean "couldn't" in _"*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking?" _in the sense of *past ability.* And I should have mentioned it in the OP. It's just that it completely slipped my mind that it could be taken as referred to a future action when I was posting. I only realized it after I'd gotten the first two replies.
> And now it's gotten *confusing* for me because I still don't know if it is possible to use it in the OP or not.


Precisely _because _it's ambiguous (i.e., confusing for everyone who might read it), it does not qualify as carrying the meaning you intended (past ability) : if that is the meaning you wish all readers to get, you should not use it.  You can get around this by saying "Were they unable to cast ..." this means the same as only one of the meanings of "couldn't" so it is unambiguous.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> You can get around this by saying "Were they unable to cast ..."


OK. But what I don't get is what is the difference then between "_Were they not able to cast someone else?"_ and _*"Couldn't *they *have cast* someone better looking?"._


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> OK. But what I don't get is what is the difference then between "_Were they not able to cast someone else?"_ and _*"Couldn't *they *have cast* someone better looking?"._


Who said they were different???
I suggested "Were they not able to cast someone else?" to "get around" (i.e., remove) the ambiguity precisely* because it means the same as*   "Couldn't they have cast someone better looking?".
They are both different from "Couldn't they cast someone better looking?".


----------



## Phoebe1200

Are you saying that _"*Couldn't *they* have cast *someone better looking?"_ is used in the sense of *past ability* too?


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> Are you saying that _"*Couldn't *they* have cast *someone better looking?"_ is used in the sense of *past ability* too?


Wow - I sometimes wonder whether you read these posts carefully.  It can_* ONLY*_ be used for past ability/choice.


----------



## Phoebe1200

For example,

I *couldn't open *the window yesterday*. *(I wasn't able to open it*=past ability*)
I *couldn't have opened *the window yesterday*. *(because I wasn't even in the house*=past possibility or impossibility *in this case)


----------



## JulianStuart

There are quite a few ways in which we use "could"
E.g.,
I could open the window yesterday, but today I couldn't open the window even if you begged me - I broke my arm last night.

but the key for your OP and #17 is


Phoebe1200 said:


> I couldn't *have* opened the window. (because I wasn't even in the house=*past* possibility)


----------



## Phoebe1200

If we turn the OP into statement sentences _"They *couldn't have cast *someone better looking" _and _"They *couldn't cast* someone better looking", _what do they tell you?  There has to be some nuance between them.


----------



## Franco-filly

Phoebe1200 said:


> If we turn the OP into statement sentences _"They *couldn't have cast *someone better looking" _and _"They *couldn't cast* someone better looking", _what do they tell you?  There has to be some nuance between them.


It's all about the timing.

"They couldn't have cast someone better looking"  means "He/she is the best looking person they could have cast (when they did the castings  i.e. in the past)  

"They couldn't cast someone better looking" equates to "This is the best looking person they could cast (a. *if* the casting is taking place now or b. *if* the were to re-do the castings in the future)


----------



## Phoebe1200

Franco-filly said:


> "They couldn't cast someone better looking" equates to "This is the best looking person they could cast (a. *if* the casting is taking place now or b. *if* the were to re-do the castings in the future)


Oops!  I forgot to mention in post 21 that in this sentence "_They *couldn't cast *someone better looking_", I only mean "couldn't" in the sense of a past ability ( weren't able to ).
And now having that in mind, could you tell me the nuance between these:

"_They *couldn't cast *someone better looking_"
"_They *couldn't have cast *someone better looking_"


----------



## e2efour

If you said _They couldn't cast someone better looking_ (referring to the past), you would have to have a reason to say this (it also does not fit your context). It just means that they were not able to cast someone better looking, which would be a somewhat strange thing to say in one sentence). You could say _Despite every effort, they weren't able to cast anyone who was better looking. _In other words, he was the best they could find.
_They couldn't have cast someone better looking_ means that they chose the best-looking person. Don't read it literally -- it's a special way of saying this.

Compare these two sentences in reply to the question _Why did you paint the fence red?_
1. _Because I couldn't paint it green. _(meaning that you were not able to do for the same reasons in 2.)
2._ I couldn't have painted it green. _(the shop had no red left, the neighbours would have objected, it was against the law, etc.)

The difference between 1. and 2. is that in the latter you are emphasising that it would have been impossible for you to paint it green.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thanks for the explanations. Still trying to fully understand the difference though.


e2efour said:


> If you said _They couldn't cast someone better looking_ (referring to the past), you would have to have a reason to say this


Do you mean that I would have to have been present at the casting in order to say that they were not able to cast someone better looking?


----------



## JulianStuart

> e2efour said: ↑
> If you said _They couldn't cast someone better looking_ (referring to the past), you would have to have *a reason* to say this





Phoebe1200 said:


> Thanks for the explanations. Still trying to fully understand the difference though.
> 
> Do you mean that I would have to have been present at the casting in order to say that they were not able to cast someone better looking?


That would be one possible reason, but not the only one


----------



## e2efour

If you say _They couldn't cast someone better looking_, the reply might be _Why couldn't they? _
If you said _They couldn't have cast someone better looking_, it would be understandable without a reason. To say _Why couldn't they?_ would mean that you did not understand the idiom.


----------



## e2efour

Just to make this clear, let's choose a sentence that is easier to understand.

1. _They couldn't do a better job._ (In reference to the past, this means that they were not able to do a better job.)
2. _They couldn't have done a better job. _(This should be understood as meaning that they did an excellent job, i.e. that they could not have done a better job even if they had tried.)

Another example:
3. _They couldn't find her. _(They looked for her but were not able to find her.)
4. _They couldn't have found her. _This means either a) It was an impossible task or b) I don't believe that they found her (disbelief). Other interpretations may be possible.


----------



## Phoebe1200

And now getting back to the OP, are your explanations equally true for the question forms? 

_"*Couldn't *they* cast *someone better looking?" (Were they unable to )
"*Couldn't *they* have cast *someone better looking?"_


----------



## e2efour

You can't expect to turn a statement into a question and automatically not change the meaning.
_Couldn't they cast someone better looking? _was explained in #3 as a suggestion.
You could use it if you were present during the casting.

_Couldn't they have cast someone better looking? _means you are asking about what they did in the past. You think that the person they cast was not very good-looking. It is the same as _Were they not able to cast someone better looking.?_


----------



## Phoebe1200

Sorry, I want to ask again. Can both questions 
"_*Couldn't* they *cast *someone better looking?_"(*Were* they *not able* to)
"_*Couldn't* they *have cast *someone better looking?_"

be used in the OP question?


----------



## e2efour

Since _Couldn't they cast ...?_ is likely to be a suggestion, my answer to your question would be no.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> That would be one possible reason, but not the only one



I'd be most grateful if you could tell me what other reasons there could be. It would really help me a lot to know them and understand the usage better.


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> I'd be most grateful if you could tell me what other reasons there could be. It would really help me a lot to know them and understand the usage better.


We don't normally do lists but, someone could have told you - you didn't have to be there yourself.  Is that the kind of thing you are having difficulty thinking up reasons for. Being there is not required to use that verb form


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> someone could have told you - you didn't have to be there yourself. Is that the kind of thing you are having difficulty thinking up reasons for.


Yes. You mean like I would have to have some kind of information about how the casting actually went in order to be able to state something like this?

_They *couldn't cast* someone better looking.(*weren't able to*)_


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> Yes. You mean like I would have to have some kind of information about how the casting actually went in order to be able to state something like this?
> 
> _They *couldn't cast* someone better looking.(*weren't able to*)_


Yes - it's no different than any other statement you make - you need to know it (that they were unable to) before you can state it (unless you want to bluff or lie)  

In this example, though, I would say that "anyone" would be preferred/correct compared to someone, because it's now a simple negative statement - but that's drifting in to a separate subject.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> Yes - it's no different than any other statement you make - you need to know it (that they were unable to) before you can state it (unless you want to bluff or lie)


And the same goes for its question form too?
_
*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking? (*were they unable to*)_


----------



## JulianStuart

"... suddenly a new actor joins the cast, but he's not very easy on the eyes ..."
You already have the information, that's why you asked the question.  Phoebe , you have lost me


----------



## Phoebe1200

But I meant the kind of information that tells me the actual reasons of why this particular actor was cast and my context doesn't tell me that, I just see the result of casting and I'm not happy about it.
And we said that in order to say the positive statement _They *couldn't cast* someone better looking.(*weren't able to*), _I have to have some knowledge of why they weren't able to cast someone else. So my question in post 37 was: Do I need to have some kind of information about the casting in order to ask the question form of the statement too?

_*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking? (*were they unable to*)_


----------



## JulianStuart

Phoebe1200 said:


> But I meant the kind of information that tells me the actual reasons of why this particular actor was cast and my context doesn't tell me that, I just see the result of casting and I'm not happy about it.
> And we said that in order to say the positive statement _They *couldn't cast* someone better looking.(*weren't able to*), _I have to have some knowledge of why they weren't able to cast someone else. So my question in post 37 was: Do I need to have some kind of information about the casting in order to ask the question form of the statement too?
> 
> _*Couldn't* they *cast* someone better looking? (*were they unable to*)_


I'm still confused??? It is precisely because you don't have that information that you are asking the question so someone will give you the information  If you had the information " that tells me the actual reasons of why this particular actor was cast", why would you ask???


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> If you had the information " that tells me the actual reasons of why this particular actor was cast", why would you ask???


You're right about this. Sorry.

But then I want to ask.Do I have to have some information in order to say this statement?
_They *couldn't have cast* someone better looking._


----------



## JulianStuart

Yes - it's no different than any other statement you make - you need to know it (that they were unable to) before you can state it (unless you want to bluff or lie)

(See #28 for an example of the effect of including "have" in the statement.)


----------



## Phoebe1200

1) When I say _*Couldn't *they_ _*have cast* someone better looking?,_ does the meaning of it equals to that of saying _Was it impossible for them to cast someone else?
_
2) And if 'yes', is that the only meaning it implies?


----------



## JulianStuart

Yes and yes.
(Assuming the result of someone's choice can be considered impossible!)


----------



## e2efour

There is a literal meaning to this and another meaning.
You haven't explained what you want to say in #1, as far as I can tell.
Instead of asking about different meanings, I think it would be more useful if you asked whether the sentence conveys what you are asking.
_Couldn't they have cast someone else? _is a rhetorical question or a statement. You would not normally expect an answer.


----------



## JulianStuart

e2efour said:


> There is a literal meaning to this and another meaning.
> You haven't explained what you want to say in #1, as far as I can tell.
> Instead of asking about different meanings, I think it would be more useful if you asked whether the sentence conveys what you are asking.
> _Couldn't they have cast someone else? _is a rhetorical question or a statement. You would not normally expect an answer.


----------



## Phoebe1200

e2efour said:


> There is a literal meaning to this


Could I ask you to tell me what meaning is that? What do you mean by literal?


----------



## e2efour

If you take the sentence literally, you might get the answer _They could_ or _They couldn't. _
Neither of these answers tells you much. Would you have been satisfied with one of them, or would you have expected an answer at all in your context?

The point is that I don't think it would be taken as a question in the circumstances, but rather as a strong statement of what you think.


----------



## Phoebe1200

e2efour said:


> There is a literal meaning to this and another meaning.


Thank you. And by another meaning, you mean this one?
_Was it impossible for them to cast someone better looking?
_
Or maybe if not, please tell me what you mean by _"another meaning". _


----------



## e2efour

No, that is the literal meaning.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Then, could you please tell me what you meant by _"another meaning"_?


----------



## e2efour

I told you the literal meaning in #50.
The other meaning is that it is a rhetorical question.


----------



## Phoebe1200

JulianStuart said:


> In this example, though, I would say that "anyone" would be preferred/correct compared to someone, because it's now a simple negative statement - but that's drifting in to a separate subject.


I just wanted to say that I appreciate this tip.


----------



## Phoebe1200

I don't know what to say because words really can't describe how thankful I am to each of you, especially Julian and e2efour. I truly appreciate all of your help and kindness. 

Have a wonderful day!


----------

