Hi, Dallas Hinton!
I read your message from 08.08.2019 11:34


 AK>> "it is a mirror of the original land bridge that (had) connected
 AK>> the island to the mainland more than 500 years ago."

 AK>> I can't understand the sense of "would have
connected" in "the
 AK>> bridge that would have connected the island to the mainland more
 AK>> than 500 years ago."

 DH> I'd suggest that this is journalese -- a newspaper/magazine writer
 DH> trying to sound more erudite than the material deserves!

 DH> Having said that, the phrase "would have...." is possibly short
 DH> for "if this bridge still existed it would have....", but it's a
 DH> horribly cumbersome way of saying, as you suggested, "used to
 DH> connected".

Why? We have the exact time in the past (500 years ago). So, we can use the
Past Indefinite (the Simple Past) if we speak of the real fact that the
bridge connected two points at that time.

Bye, Dallas!
Alexander Koryagin
english_tutor 2019

---