Japanese text book

what do you think about number 6?

Attached: 4daeaf03-9954-454c-94a1-284b8f1f76b1..jpg (5111x846, 836K)

will be

it's (1)
but the correct answer is (5) better be

would be

all of the above

1

why is "would be" not correct?
I think "would" sometimes mean like an assumption but not just past tense.

will be

might be

It's because you can't end a sentence on would; it's a hypothetical.
"Ken's mother would be cooking roast chicken if Ken hadn't fed it to the cat." is correct.

It's because of the context. When Ken COMES home, his mother WILL be cooking. It's not a matter of being polite to the imaginary moommy cooking my tendies, it's about being FACTUALLY accurate,

It's in the future, so "will be", because of [this afternoon].

would be is hypothetical
like saying "that would be a bad idea"
"could be" or "might be" would also work fine

would be would be (he) correct if the sentence was
"if Ken came home from school this afternoon, his mother would be cooking roast chicken."
but he didn't so she didn't. would be is used with possibilities and the original sentence is not a possibility, it's a fact that she'll be cooking chicken

Thank you for your kindness.
I always confuse when think about tense...

>it's a fact that she'll be cooking chicken
Something about this declaration is hilarious to me.

>Ken's mother ( ) cooking roast chicken when he comes from school this afternoon

hence

A point if confusion could arise from "could be" vs "would be" since they would both convey a hypothetical future
the difference there would be that "would" implies procedure while "could" is questioning

How do you know that she hasn't finished cooking already? He comes home this afternoon, but there is no indication that the cooking happens at the same time instead of five years ago.

The sentence would be different entirely, but the answer would still remain.

"When he comes home, cooked chicken WILL BE waiting for him"

Because there is no correct option for that.

Alpha post.

There's no reason those two clauses need to agree with each other, though. You would use "When Ken comes home from school this afternoon, his mother will be cooking roast chicken" when you know for a fact that both Ken will come home from school this afternoon and that his mother will be cooking roast chicken. You would use "When Ken comes home from school this afternoon, his mother would be cooking roast chicken" when you know for a fact that Ken will come home from school this afternoon, but you are only speculating about what his mother would be doing when Ken comes home from school. They're both perfectly fine sentences, but they convey different meanings.

They are not. The second sentence is incomplete, as outlined previously.

You're thinking of "could."

>come home
>mom's not cooking chicken
What the FUCK

will rape him first and then be

Attached: Capture.png (1102x926, 842K)

syntax would be different if that was the case

>grammer

im an esl

Rape her

Based

This is Japan we're talking about.

Attached: Japanese family life.jpg (1200x230, 107K)

Well no, she'd be cooking dinner whether he came home from school or got isekai'd by a truck, the only difference is whether he eats it or not