might do/might have done

WB: -A number of men might make excellent citizens were they not soured by the recollection of all that they had undergone.
=======================
With no context, could this sentence refer to both the past and the hypothetical present? (MIGHT MAKE...WERE...)
////////////////////////

What leads you to believe that could/might be possible, WB?

The usual case:

-If I told him this, he would...

In grammar, WOULD could be a past habit; or a present hypothetical; but I am not sure whether MIGHT is the same here. If yes, I'll have to put another question here, which is much more complicated.

WB: In grammar, WOULD could be a past habit;
----------

Can you give an example of this using the example sentence you offered, WB?

-My brother was very stubborn. If I told him drinking was bad, he would throw a tantrum. But now he is dead. I really miss those days when he did this.

-My brother was very stubborn. If I told him drinking was bad, he would throw a tantrum. But now he is dead. I really miss those days when he did this.
---------------

Okay, WB, now continue with your questions. Please give some example sentences for what you think is potentially possible.

-A number of men might make excellent citizens were they not soured by the recollection of all that they had undergone.


This is the sentence I don't know whether is possible.

It is possible, grammatical and fully comprehensible.

You mean possible in referring to the past?

It is impossible to conclusively determine without context, WB.

Here is how I see it.

-A number of men might, in the future, make excellent citizens if they were not now in the state of being where they are soured by the recollection of all that they had/have undergone.

um...In other words you can't imagine that sentence used to refer to the past?

If you want it to describe a finished scenario.


A number of those men might HAVE MADE excellent citizens if they had not been soured by the recollection of all that they had undergone. But it's too late now as they are all dead.

Why not ask your much more complicated question?

no no.. um....

Your sentence would mean they were soured etc, and of course they did not make excellent citizens; but the question is, I just want to express a past possibility; whether it happened, no one knows.

-They might... if they were... (referring to the past)

Possible or impossible?(in any situation/context.)

jtt's sentence: A number of those men might HAVE MADE excellent citizens if they had not been soured by the recollection of all that they had undergone. But it's too late now as they are all dead.
////////////////

WB wrote: Your sentence would mean they were soured etc, and of course they did not make excellent citizens; but the question is, I just want to express a past possibility; whether it happened, no one knows.

-They might... if they were... (referring to the past)

Possible or impossible?(in any situation/context.)

/////////////////////


A number of those men could have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men might have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men may have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men probably would have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men almost certainly would have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men would have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

A number of those men definitely would have been excellent citizens but we have no way of knowing if that ever happened.

Many more variations on that theme, WB.

I think it seems more like the hypothetical present. To make it hypothetical past, "make" would have to become "have made". I'm not positive, though.

Can I say this?:

-My brother and I lived in Nagasaki 30 years ago, and now he is dead. At that time, we were forced to join in. If we refused, we might be put on trial; if we joined the army, we might get killed in the battlefield.

MIGHT DO could be used to refer to the past, merely expressing a past possibility, without telling what did happen in the past, do you agree?

Nope, you can't, WB.

My brother and I lived in Nagasaki 30 years ago, and now he is dead. At that time, we were forced to join (in). If we HAD refused, we might HAVE BEEN put on trial; if we HAD joined the army, we might HAVE GOTTEN killed ON the battlefield.



Explain with examples if you can.

Thank you~

But a new question comes up:

Do you not think ON the battlefield and IN [...] are just the same? If not, then what's the difference between them?

The difference is only one of idiomatic expression, WB.