1. It will be Chris.
2. It shall be Chris.
*3. It will have been Chris.
*4. It shall have been Chris.
5. It would have been Chris.
6. It should have been Chris.
7. It can be Chris.
*8. It can have been Chris.
9. It could have been Chris.
------------------------------
Does #1 mean #2? What is the difference in meaning? Are #3, #4, and #8 ungrammatical?
What is the difference between #5 and #6?
All are grammatical in some contexts. Though the distinction is fading away,
"will" is used in the indicative mood
"shall" is the imperative mood
(reversed in first person)
Steve is right.
#8 is not ungrammatical, but having a present tense auxiliary verb is very strange. This would not be used very often, if at all.
To analyze the differences and meanings of the given sentences:
1. "It will be Chris." - This sentence expresses a future event or situation in which the subject "it" will be Chris. For example, if someone asks who will be the next president, and you confidently state, "It will be Chris." This sentence is in the simple future tense.
2. "It shall be Chris." - Similar to the previous sentence, this sentence also expresses a future event or situation where "it" will be Chris. The word "shall" is less commonly used in modern English but carries a sense of a strong assertion or determination. In terms of meaning, this sentence is essentially the same as sentence #1.
3. "It will have been Chris." - This sentence is in the future perfect tense, which refers to an action or event that is expected to be completed before a specific future point. For instance, if someone asks who will have finished the project by tomorrow, you can say, "It will have been Chris." The sentence implies that by the specified future time, Chris will have finished the project.
4. "It shall have been Chris." - Similar to sentence #3, this sentence is also in the future perfect tense, indicating an action or event that is expected to be completed before a specific future point. The use of "shall" once again brings a sense of strong assertion or determination. The meaning of this sentence is essentially the same as #3.
5. "It would have been Chris." - This sentence is in the conditional perfect tense, expressing a hypothetical or unreal condition in the past. For example, if someone says, "If John hadn't been absent, who would have won the race?" You can respond, "It would have been Chris." This means that if John hadn't been absent, Chris would have won the race.
6. "It should have been Chris." - This sentence also expresses a hypothetical or unreal condition in the past. However, it adds a sense of expectation or obligation. For instance, if someone says, "John made many mistakes. Who should have won the award?" You can reply, "It should have been Chris." This sentence implies that based on the mistakes John made, Chris deserved to win the award.
7. "It can be Chris." - This sentence expresses the possibility or ability for "it" to be Chris. For example, if someone asks if Chris is eligible for a particular role, you can respond, "It can be Chris." This sentence implies that Chris meets the requirements or qualifications.
8. "It can have been Chris." - This sentence seems to combine the previous sentence structures to express the possibility or ability of an action happening in the past. However, this specific combination is not commonly used in English, and it may sound unnatural or ungrammatical to some native speakers.
9. "It could have been Chris." - This sentence is in the conditional perfect tense, expressing a hypothetical or unreal condition in the past, but with a sense of possibility. For instance, if someone says, "Only one person could have solved this puzzle. Who was it?" You can reply, "It could have been Chris." This means that Chris had the potential to solve the puzzle.
In summary, the differences in meaning between sentences #1 and #2 are minimal, primarily related to the use of "will" and "shall." Sentences #3, #4, and #8 might sound ungrammatical or unusual, and their usage will largely depend on the context or specific intention of the speaker. Finally, sentences #5 and #6 have similar structures but differ in the sense of expectation or obligation conveyed.