# You should have



## lingkky

The task has been given to you. "you should have done the task yestersay"

Does the sentence mean
 yesterday it was the time for you to do the task but it was necessary to finish it yestersay

      Or
Yesterday it was the time for you to do and complete it?

May I know which one does the sentence mean?


----------



## boozer

lingkky said:


> May I know which one does the sentence mean?


I see no difference between your two interpretations.


----------



## sound shift

Neither do I.


----------



## lingkky

It can't be.

One mean" the task should be completed "but another suggests "the task should be at least partially completed".

Which one?


----------



## boozer

Well, neither of your interpretations suggests any 'partiality', but now that you ask, 'should have done it' means that you should have done it completely, not that you should have just begun doing it.


----------



## sound shift

You're mistaken, lingkky.

Anyway, you can say "You should have started the task yesterday" or "You should have started and finished the task yesterday". There's a difference between those two.


----------



## lingkky

Well

"You should have done it yesterday"
"You should do it yesterday. "

May I know the difference between them? They make me confused.


----------



## Florentia52

The difference is that "You should do it yesterday" makes no sense. It's not possible, now that yesterday is in the past, to go back and do something yesterday.


----------



## wandle

Florentia52 said:


> The difference is that "You should do it yesterday" makes no sense. It's not possible, now that yesterday is in the past, to go back and do something yesterday.


To put it another way: 'should have done it' refers to the past (any time before now); 'should do it' refers to the future (any time after now).


----------



## lingkky

"you should have done it yesterday "

Does the sentence strongly suggest that the speaker hope that action of doing the task only to be carried out yesterday but not earlier than that ?


----------



## wandle

The speaker means that the listener was obliged (had a duty) to perform the task yesterday. There is no suggestion of an earlier time.


----------



## Vronsky

wandle said:


> 'should have done it' refers to the past (any time before now); 'should do it' refers to the future (any time after now).


So the following sentence is incorrect?
"I should have done it by tomorrow, but five minutes ago, the boss called me and said that we aren't in a hurry, so I can put it off now."


----------



## wandle

Vronsky said:


> "I should have done it by tomorrow, but five minutes ago, the boss called me and said that we aren't in a hurry, so I can put it off now."


That is a different context. In that sentence, we can read 'should' as meaning 'would'.

On the other hand, if we read 'should' as expressing obligation, then it refers to the past because that obligation had come to an end five minutes earlier, when the boss made that call.

I would try to avoid that form of expression, though. It is better to say 'I was supposed to have it done by tomorrow'.


----------



## lingkky

wandle said:


> That is a different context. In that sentence, we can read 'should' as meaning 'would'.
> 
> On the other hand, if we read 'should' as expressing obligation, then it refers to the past because that obligation had come to an end five minutes earlier, when the boss made that call.
> 
> I would try to avoid that form of expression, though. It is better to say 'I was supposed to have it done by tomorrow'.


how can it be read as past as the time marker is “by tomorrow”？I cannot understand it.


----------



## Florentia52

As wandle explained, this is a different use of "should" (meaning "would"), discussion of which would be confusing and off-topic in this thread.

This thread should continue to focus on questions about "You should have done the task yesterday."

Florentia52, moderator


----------



## boozer

wandle said:


> 'should do it' refers to the future (any time after now).


Rather "any time after the moment in reference" because it can be used in past-tense sentences as well.
_He took his umbrella so that he should not get wet_.


----------



## wandle

boozer said:


> "any time after the moment in reference"


True, but I felt such a formula would hardly be helpful to the enquirer. Chinese languages apparently do not have verbs defined by time.
The idea was to create in short, vivid words a contrast showing the difference between the tenses.


----------



## wandle

lingkky said:


> how can it be read as past as the time marker is “by tomorrow”？I cannot understand it.


Verbs in English have tenses. That means that the verb carries the time meaning in itself. It does not depend on an external time marker.


----------



## Vronsky

Florentia52 said:


> As wandle explained, this is a different use of "should" (meaning "would"), discussion of which would be confusing and off-topic in this thread.


It might help Lingkky to understand what exactly "should have done" is. As you native speakers explain this, it's not quite precise. "Should have done" has nothing to do with a time reference. All it means is the contrary to reality.
"You should have done it yesterday" - but you didn't.
"You should have done it by tomorrow." - but now you shouldn't.
That's it.


----------



## wandle

Vronsky said:


> "Should have done" has nothing to do with a time reference.


On the contrary, 'should have done' definitely refers to the past.


----------



## Vronsky

wandle said:


> On the contrary, 'should have done' definitely refers to the past.


"Should have done" in terms of grammar is a modal verb plus perfect infinitive. There is nothing in it itself that would refer to the past.


----------



## wandle

'Should have done' is a modal verb plus perfect infinitive. That means it refers to the past.


----------



## boozer

wandle said:


> T Chinese languages apparently do not have verbs defined by time.


Goodness me! Had no idea...


----------



## kentix

_"You should have *done it* by tomorrow."_

I would not say that sentence (in AE).

_"You need to do it by tomorrow."
_
Edit:
Maybe you are thinking of:
_You should have* it done* by tomorrow._

That's a different sentence.

[Cross-posted with Julian below on edit]


----------



## JulianStuart

kentix said:


> _"You should have done it by tomorrow."_
> 
> I would not say that sentence (in AE).
> 
> _"You need to do it by tomorrow."_


Or, shifing the word it, we have a very similar look but different meaning

You should have it done by tomorrow.


----------



## Vronsky

kentix said:


> _"You should have *done it* by tomorrow."_
> 
> I would not say that sentence (in AE).
> 
> _"You need to do it by tomorrow."_


So even if someone no longer needs to do it?


----------



## kentix

In that case I would say:

_Originally, you were supposed to have done it by tomorrow but the schedule has now changed._


----------



## lingkky

"I should have done it tomorrow."

Does it only work for the situation now you do no need to do it anymore？
can it be used if you are still obliged for the task？(you still need to do it)


----------



## JulianStuart

lingkky said:


> "I should have done it tomorrow."
> 
> Does it only work for the situation now you do no need to do it anymore？
> can it be used if you are still obliged for the task？


I would never use that sentence,


----------



## lingkky

"I should have it done tomorrow. "

Does it mean that "I should complete it tomorrow" or_"I was supposed to have done it by tomorrow but the schedule has now changed"?

Which one? _


----------



## JulianStuart

It means I expect to complete it tomorrow. Or, I expect to have completed it tomorrow. I expect to have it completed. etc

should

(used to express the opinion that the action of the main verb is something that may naturally be expected to occur):He should be here any minute.


----------



## lingkky

Is it correct to say
"I should have it done yesterday " to mean "I should have done it yesterday "?


----------



## wandle

lingkky said:


> Is it correct to say
> "I should have it done yesterday " to mean "I should have done it yesterday "?


No. For that meaning you need 'I should have had it done yesterday'.


----------



## london calling

lingkky said:


> "I should have done it tomorrow."
> 
> Does it only work for the situation now you do no need to do it anymore？
> can it be used if you are still obliged for the task？(you still need to do it)


I would never say that. 'I should have )done something)' refers to a past action. 



lingkky said:


> Is it correct to say
> "I should have it done yesterday " to mean "I should have done it yesterday "?



The first sentence is incorrect. The second one is fine.


----------



## kentix

Here is a sentence I came up with that uses "I should have done it tomorrow." Does it sound right to other native speakers?

_-- I called my cousin today to wish him happy birthday but I should have done it tomorrow. _
(Unfortunately, I misread the calendar.)

I think this works because it's referring to a completed action in the past.


----------



## lingkky

OK. That Is enough for me . My head is now full.I will ask again if I got problem.
Thanks for all of the explanations.


----------



## london calling

kentix said:


> Here is a sentence I came up with that uses "I should have done it tomorrow." Does it sound right to other native speakers?
> 
> _-- I called my cousin today to wish him happy birthday but I should have done it tomorrow. _
> (Unfortunately, I misread the calendar.)
> 
> I think this works because it's referring to a completed action in the past.


In that particular context it sounds fine, you're right (oh, the English language.).


----------



## Vronsky

Thanks, all! The phrase "... was/were supposed to have it done by tomorrow" I wrote down in my notebook


----------



## Ivan_I

In another thread I came across this sentence:

You should have returned by next Thursday. (written by a native)


----------



## JulianStuart

Ivan_I said:


> In another thread I came across this sentence:
> 
> You should have returned by next Thursday. (written by a native)


With no context or source or any other indicators being provided, I can only refer you to post #31 above for a likely/possible interpretation of "should" in your quote.


----------



## Ivan_I

JulianStuart said:


> With no context or source or any other indicators being provided, I can only refer you to post #31 above for a likely/possible interpretation of "should" in your quote.


What difference will it make if I provide all the needed? 
Here is the source
perfect infinitive unreal past situations

Here is the context:

_She was supposd to return yesterday_. Here the idea was for the return to happen yesterday. When the idea was first discussed, say eight days ago, we can imagineg someone saying "You should return next Thurday". _She was supposed to have returned yesterday _appears to be an unnecessary double past, though I am sure that many people would day it, and few would find it unnatural.
_She was supposed to have returned by yesterday_. Here the idea was for the return to have happened yesterday or before. When the idea was first discussed, say eight days ago, we can imaging someone saying "You should have returned by next Thurday". I think that many would say _She was supposed to return by yesterday,_ and few would object.

I don't see how it changes the gist of the question. The context is self-explanatory. Someone is going to leave and is asked to return by Thursday. Nothing inconceivable, as far as I can see even though I might not see far.


----------



## JulianStuart

Ivan_I said:


> What difference will it make if I provide all the needed?


You may have forgotten this when you read the first thread in the forum  It takes you to the Guideline here 


> All threads need context and background.
> English words and phrases can have many different meanings. Understanding them depends on where, when and how they are used. When you post a question, please include as much background information and context as you can.
> A question with no context may get an answer. If the question is straightforward, it may not be a wrong answer.
> But the more context you provide, the better the answers will be


Your post 41 did not ask a question but I brazenly assume you are asking if it is ever possible to say the sentence you posted.
The meaning of should in #31 could apply.
A: You can go and see the doctor next Friday.
B: No, I can't , I'll still be in Russia then.
A; No, according to the schedule you sent me*, you should have (already) returned by next Thursday so you will be able to see the doctor.

* so I have a "reasonable expectation" your return "will have occurred before Friday".


JulianStuart said:


> should
> 
> (used to express the opinion that the action of the main verb is something that may naturally be expected to occur):He should be here any minute.


----------



## Ivan_I

[Side comment removed - DonnyB - moderator]



JulianStuart said:


> The meaning of should in #31 could apply.
> A: You can go and see the doctor next Friday.
> B: No, I can't , I'll still be in Russia then.
> A; No, according to the schedule you sent me*, you should have (already) returned by next Thursday so you will be able to see the doctor.


Basically, the answer it can be used for the future. Thank you very much.


----------



## Ivan_I

kentix said:


> _-- I called my cousin today to wish him happy birthday but I should have done it tomorrow. _


Why not "_wish him *A* happy birthday"?_


----------



## london calling

You can say that as well, in BE at least.


----------

