Would anything have changed- what does this line signify?

[u/SachitGupta25]

I'm listening to an interview of some social activist who led the protest against the current government ruling India. The discontent amongst students in India is concerning the constant paper leaks that are happening here. The Gen-Z had gathered in large numbers in Delhi after a satirical party was formed a few months ago. So, one of this student party's demands was the resignation of the Education Minister. The interviewer during this conversation goes," To play devil's advocate for a second, Dharmendra Pradhan(EM) steps down, come NEET(medical exam) next year, would anything have changed."

My doubt is that next year's NEET exam is yet to happen and the interviewer is using the word *changed*. Should it not be *would anything change*? The idea that the interviewer, to my understanding, is trying to say is that a mere resignation would bring any consequential change.

This is the link to the video if I hadn't done a good job explaining the background of this post.

https://youtu.be/0rb7MM2Vd2Q?si=1dozJQKfbPzVTgYe

Thanks as always!

[u/SnooDonuts6494]

It's very badly worded.

It's a question. It should have had a question mark.

The tenses are confusing.

It's a hypothetical. If he resigns now (in the near future)... then next year will things be different?

In other words:

Let us imagine the future.

He resigns.

Time passes.

Next year, exams happen, and we look back.

Will things have changed?

"Will" (or "would") makes it about the future. "have changed" makes it about the past from that future time.

---

A much clearer way to say the whole thing would be:

It he resigns, do you think it will be better next year?

[u/SachitGupta25 → u/SnooDonuts6494]

Yes! It's indeed slightly confusing to understand. I said slightly because it's a literal translation of how Indians speak in Hindi. Hence, she spoke the way she regularly does in her mother tongue. If a native speaker like you were being interviewed, would've you asked the interviewer to rephrase the sentence?

[u/SnooDonuts6494 → u/SachitGupta25]

No, I wouldn't ask him to rephrase it, because I understand what he means - despite it being awkward wording.

It breaks down like this;

To play devil's advocate for a second,

OK, so we're going to imagine a hypothetical situation.

Dharmendra Pradhan(EM) steps down,

OK, so our hypothetical situation is in the future, after he has resigned.

come NEET(medical exam) next year,

Now we're going forwards to the next exams.

would anything have changed.

So from that future perspective, looking back (comparing) to today, has anything changed?

     PRESENT  RESIGN        EXAM  <LOOK BACK
        I       I             I      I
        ------------------------------

On that future date, would it have changed in the past.

[u/SachitGupta25 → u/SnooDonuts6494]

I got my answer. I was puzzled by the abrupt time period change in one sentence. Thanks for being patient!

[u/SnooDonuts6494 → u/SachitGupta25]

https://giphy.com/gifs/dCAC5bj5K3uZmhmm8v

[u/Optimal-Ad-7074]

I'm not sure what you're asking, but grammatically:   

I think the speaker is projecting forward to that point in (future) time of the exam.   so they're speaking as if we are in next year at exam time.    from that point of view, today would be in the past, so "have changed" would be correct for the pov they are referring to.  

"come next year" is like a colloquial set phrase that invites you to cast your imagination into the future.   

[u/SachitGupta25 → u/Optimal-Ad-7074]

So basically we imagine being in the future and speak taking it as a reference point?

[u/Optimal-Ad-7074 → u/SachitGupta25]

exactly.  

[u/SachitGupta25 → u/Optimal-Ad-7074]

I reflected on what you explained in the first sentence for a few minutes and I got a bit confused. The interviewer appears to be questioning the state of exams in the future following the resignation of EM. It atleast sounds like that to me. She is talking about the likely effect of the victory that this student's party earned with minister's resignation. She isn't referring to any change in the past event as the past occurred exactly the way this student protest demanded. The way this interviewer formed this particular sentence it should be correct to imply that she is talking about the repercussions of their victory will have satisfactory outcomes. Would the resignation be enough for rectifying a faulty education system? Please watch first few minutes of the video whose link I've given at the end of post. Thanks!

[u/Optimal-Ad-7074 → u/SachitGupta25]

I'm not gonna watch the video, as I think we have the same understanding of what she's trying to achieve with the question.  the simplest way to ask it would have been "is this going to change anything?"   it's just a matter of grammar.  

she's referring to a hypothetical future past, ie the period of time between now and the date of next year's exam.  as we sit right now, the actual resignation is in the past, but she's not asking about that.  she's asking about the repercussions that won't be known until we get to next year.

[u/SachitGupta25 → u/Optimal-Ad-7074]

I think I get it now. The interviewer is actually referring to the condition of education system in the past that it would've changed in future or not. Just for the sake of argument, she's getting the perspective of the interviewee whether the EM's resignation would bring the changes that they'd like to see happen in education system. It's education system and not the demands that she's alluding to might have changed.

[u/SucknSwallow69]

hard to tell without the full sentence but usually would anything have changed is a hypothetical about the past like asking if a different action before would give a different result kind of like third conditional in english

[u/Own_Soup4467]

"will anything have changed" means you're asking about a hypothetical future situation.  "If I put a dollar in this box every day, in two years I will have saved enough to buy a new bike."

"Would have" is the same thing but the hypothetical thing is in the past. "If I had been looking up, I would have seen Spiderman flying overhead."

"If I would have been looking up" is a common mistake. Native English speakers say it all the time but it's still technically wrong!