The 1,500-year-old statues disappeared from an airport warehouse hours before they were to be flown to Paris for an exhibition at the Guimet Museum. Interpol has been asked to help track them down. One consignment of items had already been sent to France when the theft occurred on Saturday.
A government spokesman told Reuters news agency that the artefacts already in Paris would have to be returned to Bangladesh. "The Guimet Museum would be informed, regretfully, that it would not be possible to go ahead with holding the exhibition of the items as planned," a Bangladesh government statement said.
Masterpieces Dhaka police say they have launched a nationwide hunt for the statues and have arrested 15 people in connection with the theft. The terracotta statues, valued at about $65,000, were being sent to the Paris for a major international exhibition on Bangladesh's history and culture.
"These are masterpieces and very valuable to our cultural heritage," Shamsuzzaman Khan, a former head of the Bangladesh National Museum, told the Associated Press news agency. "The government should not have agreed to send them abroad."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My question is on the following sentence of the above: A government spokesman told Reuters news agency that the artefacts already in Paris would have to be returned to Bangladesh. 1. Artefacts will have to return to Bangladesh. The above is similar to the following: 2. Artefacts must return to Bangladesh.
What is the meaning of 'would have to be returned to Bangladesh' ? Is it a suggestion?
Top answer
Hi Rotter In your sentence, "would have to" is the reported speech version of "will have to". Yes, it basically means the same thing as must . No, I don't see it as being intended as a suggestion, but rather as a statement of fact -- a statement that something will be necessary to do.
— Yankee
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
In your sentence, "would have to" is the reported speech version of "will have to". Yes, it basically means the same thing as must. No, I don't see it as being intended as a suggestion, but rather as a statement of fact -- a statement that something will be necessary to do.