It could be/might be/could have been/might have been so cold

[thehammer]

Hello, which modal is correct and in which tense?

1- It could be/might be/could have been/might have been so cold in Russia in winter so I decided not to go there.

2- It is a big jungle. Eery year many people get lost in it. I heard that you went there a month ago. You could/might also get lost/ You could/might have also got lost.

 

[Barque]

1- It could be/might be/could have been/might have been so cold in Russia in winter so I decided not to go there.

None of them fit this context.

It can be very cold in Russia in winter, so I decided not to go there.
I prefer: Russia can be very cold in winter, so I decided not to go there.

You could use "could be" if you aren't sure. I don't think we should go to Russia. It could be cold at this time.

Please don't use "so" as a synonym of "very". It can work that way only in some contexts. For example if you've been to Russia, you might come back and say to someone "It was so cold over there!"

2- It is a big jungle. Eery year many people get lost in it. I heard that you went there a month ago. You could/might also get lost/ You could/might have also got lost.

Many people get lost in that jungle every year. I heard you went there a month ago. You could also have got lost. Did you?

You can't use "could get lost" if the event's in the past, not in this way at least. You could use it as a general piece of advice.
I heard you go hiking in that jungle. Be careful. It's huge and you could get lost.

 

[Barque]

Please remove the quote box around your message. I can't quote it to reply.

 

[thehammer]

Can I also say 'it might be cold at this time'? What difference would it create If I said 'might have got lost'?

 

[Barque]

"Might" expresses a slightly greater degree of uncertainty in these contexts, in my opinion.

 

[jutfrank]

I might have got lost.
I could have got lost.

I distinguish the difference between these as follows: The difference is in the kind of possibility they express, not in any degree of certainty. Where might expresses a real possibility, could expresses a theoretical possibility.

 

[thehammer]

I might have got lost.
I could have got lost.

I distinguish the difference between these as follows: The difference is in the kind of possibility they express, not in any degree of certainty. Where might expresses a real possibility, could expresses a theoretical possibility.

Thank you. In some cases 'could' mean past ability. So in the following sentence does it mean possibility or ability? I want to mean possibility so I have used 'might' too. As it's an expression of possibility, either works.

A- I could/might have passed the exam but I did not studied hard.

 

[jutfrank]

I don't understand what you want to say. Try again. Say in as many words as you can what you mean and we'll tell you how to say it in good English.

 

[Tarheel]

@thehammer Don't read this until after you respond to Jutfrank's post.



.

I could have passed the exam had I studied, but I didn't. So I didn't.

 

[Barque]

A- I could/might have passed the exam but I did not studied hard.

Use "could". "Might" could work if you changed the construction.
You need "study" in that sentence, not "studied".

I could have passed but I didn't study.
But:
I might have passed but I didn't study.

Also:
I could have passed if I'd studied.
I might have passed if I'd studied.

I think "could" there refers to both possibility and ability. It's a fine difference. (It's more important to know the difference between "I didn't study" and "I didn't studied".)