"was to be" vs "was to have been"
I have a question
- He was to be home by now.
Does it mean he was supposed to come home either before now or maybe by now?
- He was to have been home by now.
That means he was supposed to have come by the time specified that means before that time, not at that time. Am I right? Please tell me when should I use them?
If I say it the following day, should I use No. 2? I am utterly confused by them.
Solution 1:
Let's say you are speaking the following day. The correct form would be:
He was to have been home by 9.00pm (but he didn't arrive till midnight)
If you are speaking before the time of his being expected home, you would say:
He is to be home by 9.00pm
If I am reporting to someone that I have (or had) informed him of the time he is (or was) to be home I would say:
I told him he was to be home by 9.00pm
If I am reporting that he had told me that he would be home by 9.00pm then it is:
He informed me that he would be home by 9.00pm.
Solution 2:
A quick additional comment re. use: we typically use this construction when we are describing "formal or official arrangements" (BBC, Learning English).
Example from today's NYT:
"Minutes after Mr. Trump was to have taken to a podium on the campus of a large, diverse public university just west of downtown, an announcer suddenly pronounced the event over before it had begun."