The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

to have Options
Nousher Ahmed 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:24:08 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2014
Posts: 398
Neurons: 2,427
Location: Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
1.
a. He was sure to have done the work.
b. He had been sure to have done the work.
c. Doing the work he was sure.
d. Having done the work he had been sure.

Here the work was done by himself, i.e he was the person who did that work. Do you think that the sentences stated above are correct?

2.
a. I was proud to have met you.
b. I had been proud to have met you.
c. Meeting you I was proud.
d. Having meet you I had been proud.
e. I was proud to met you.

Do you think the sentences are correct? Do they mean same thing? Are there alternative ways to express these sentences?

Thanks in advance.
Tella
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 12:25:18 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 8/13/2014
Posts: 31
Neurons: 47,918
Some are correct, one is incorrect, some are complicated.

1.
a. He was sure to have done the work - meaning in the past he was sure that he has done a work, but 'have' means that this work is not yet finished and is continuing on a specific time base (had would mean finished), or, just happened it has (as in "I've just seen something weird!"), which in relation to "work" sounds slightly odd but possible.

b. He had been sure to have done the work - in the further past he was sure to have done the work that preceeded that past.

c. Doing the work he was sure - now this one requires a very particular context to be integrated into if you want it to be coherent. As an independant line it is rather odd, but in a context, say "It was hard to remember whether he was exceling in it, but at least doing the work he was sure." is good enough.

d. Having done the work he had been sure - my head hurts so much... In the further past he was sure that before that same further past he has done the work on a regular basis or just as a one-time thing.


2.

a. I was proud to have met you - one time it occured that I was proud to have met you.

b. I had been proud to have met you - same thing, only in the further past.

c. Meeting you I was proud - same context as 1.c, say "I was so ashamed at our company's workers, but meeting you I was proud."

d. Having met you I had been proud - same logic as 1.d only without the possibility of reoccurence.

e. I was proud to met you - unless this is a typo it is wrong. You could say "to have met you" or "to meet you".


When thinking about both d's my brain hurts. Perhaps I was wrong about it, another commenter would sure help.
Nousher Ahmed 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 1:15:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2014
Posts: 398
Neurons: 2,427
Location: Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Tella, thanks for you explanation. You have tried a lot to explain, but your explanation needs to be more specific, if I want to understand what you have said. Please forgive me for my following questions.

For 1a, from your explanation it seems to me that I should have used "had" instead of "have", if I want to use "was" instead of "is". I should write- "He was sure to had done the work " or "He is sure to have done the work." Please correct me, if I am wrong.

For 1b, I think you have said when this type of sentence can be used. It is not suitable for near past, but suitable for further past, and the sentence 1b is not wrong like 1a. Rather it is right. Am I right?

If I say-"Eating bread, I go to school.", does it sound unnatural? (I go to school after eating bread, i.e at first I take bread, then I go to school). If this sounds ok, please tell me why "Doing the work he was sure" is odd, if it stands alone. I could not understand the meaning of "It was hard to remember whether he was exceling in it, but at least doing the work he was sure." Please, explain the meaning of this sentence if it is possible.

1d is also used for further past. And both verbs 'to be sure' and 'completing the work" happended in further past. But I can not understand what the differences are between 1b and 1d.

Tella, you have tried a lot for me. I am really grateful to you.
thar
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 1:47:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 22,258
Neurons: 90,278
Nousher Ahmed 1 wrote:
1.
a. He was sure to have done the work.

No.
This does not mean what you think.
If he was certain of something, then that is a 'that' clause, not 'is sure + infinitive'.

He was sure that he had done the work.


If you say
He was sure to have done the work.
That has a completely different meaning.
Eg
Don't try to park in that carvpark. It is sure to be full.
I am scared I will fail the exam. It is sure to be too hard for me.
Don't worry about being late. We are sure to be there in plenty of time.


b. He had been sure to have done the work.

No.
The tenses are wrong, and as above, the infinitive structure is wrong.


c. Doing the work he was sure.


d. Having done the work he had been sure.
No to both.
Sorry, the tenses are wrong.
'Doing the work' has no tense, and the rest of the sentence is the past perfect tense for no reason.


Here the work was done by himself, i.e he was the person who did that work. Do you think that the sentences stated above are correct?

2.
a. I was proud to have met you.

Not incorrect, but only for particular situations.
Eg
I was proud. I am not any more. Now I am ashamed.

b. I had been proud to have met you.
There is no reason to use the last perfect unless required by the context.
c. Meeting you I was proud.
No. This does not work as you intend.
You need punctuation.
You have an adverbial phrase
meeting you,...
And the main verb.
I was proud.
Meeting you, I was proud.

But that does not mean I was proud of meeting you. It could mean you were proud of anything.

d. Having meet you I had been proud.
No
Far too complicated it makes no sense with those tenses.


e. I was proud to met you.
No.I was proud to + infinitive.
The verb is 'to meet'.
I was proud to meet you. ( when I met you, in the past)
I am proud to have met you ( I am proud, now, that I have met you, in the past).

Do you think the sentences are correct? Do they mean same thing? Are there alternative ways to express these sentences?



Thanks in advance.
Tella
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 2:23:19 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 8/13/2014
Posts: 31
Neurons: 47,918
Oh, how nice of you to say so! Angel Let's see...


Correction to "to" - 'x to be' is a foreshadowing of something that is speculated to happen or have happened. So "He was sure to have done the work" actually means that he probably has done the work but it is not yet proven. For example, two brothers walk home, "Is there dinner when we get home?" asks one, so the other answers: "Don't worry, Mom is sure to have finished making dinner."


1.a - Yes, it would be more appropriate to use "was sure to had..." if in the past, and "is sure to have..." in the present.

1\2.b - Again yes, 'had been' is more suitable for something that happened in the far past or when already talking in past tense and then talking about something that happened before that - "He remembered how she had smiled." - he now remembered the way she had smiled back then , which happened before. Both 2.b and 1.b are the same.

Correction to 1.d - You could say that it is the same as 1.a but in a further past.
The difference between 1.c and 1.a is the usage of "have" in 1.a as compared to "had been sure" in 1.c - "he was sure" is closer to the present than "had had been sure".

1.d is odd alone because it doesn't sound natural, you wouldn't hear someone say "Doing the work I was sure." because in English the form of words we are used to is that first comes the subject of the scentence - "I" and then comes the information about the subject. So the subject "I" did something, what did "I" do? "I" was sure to have done the work. "having done the work" is equal in the context of 1.d to "doing the work".

Some languages actually have the reverse, in which first is the info and then comes the subject, for example Japanese: "Kore wa tadashii to omoimasu" - This is right I think = I think it is right. It would be grammatically incorrect to say "I think this is right" in Japanese. In English it is possible to reverse but only if you use it correctly, for example I already have borken that rule a couple of times. Above I said "first is the subject and then comes the info" - by my rule I should have said first the subject comes and then the info comes. So it's tricky, some ways of forming sentences are right while others are not. In our case, saying "Having done the work I was sure." is unusual, however you still could hear it being said from some literary characters, for example Yoda from Star Wars says: "Judge me by my size do you?". It is grammatically incorrect but is somehow in our head accepted as high speech.

Okay so your sentence alone sounds odd alone, but you could usually hear something like your sentence said as only a part of a bigger sentence. Context is the name of the game. Let's look again at my example: "He could not remember whether he was exceling in it, but doing the work he was sure" - The first segment of the sentence, until the coma, indicates a subject - "it", what is this it? So we are putting "it" in context with the subject that is about to be revealed - work = it. In other words he could not be sure if he was doing good in the work, but at least he remembered that he did it. That is the meaning of the sentence. Both parts of the sentence would alone be incoherent, but together make a nice sentence. Having any more difficulties?


"Eating bread, I go to school" in the present tenes could mean both that you are and then went, and that you are eating while going to school. The thing that some narratives are told in present tense, "So he says x, then I say y and goes to z and said that 7 8 9". Now there is also the way of pointing subsequent events - verbing x, y happened. The problem comes when you try to combine this with the present tense narrative. We don't know whether eating bread comes before or in the time going to school. All you need to do is break the formula, for example: "I go to school (while) eating bread". Another way is to use or not "having" in a past narrative, "having eaten bread, I went to school". Another solution is to simply put context, "Eating bread, I go to school. It is quite tasty" - by mentioning that right now it is tasty after mentioning that you go to school means that you still have it on you, therefore you are in the process of eating.


How are those answers?


Nousher Ahmed 1
Posted: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:51:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2014
Posts: 398
Neurons: 2,427
Location: Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Tella, you are great. What you have done for me is good enough. I never forget your help.

Dear thar, thanks for your nice explanation. Please, say me which are the right form of 1c and 1d.

"Meeting you, I was proud."- in this sentence it does not mean that I was proud of meeting you. It could mean you were proud of anything. So why "Meeting you" is written with "I was proud"? Please explain it. If it is possible, explain with example.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.