"to have him joined" and "to have him join"
Kevin
I have a puzzle about this sentence, "it has been great to have him
join me on the Learning Annex's wave of success."
I always see a structure of "to have him joined xxxxx" instead of " to
have him join xxxxx"
I wonder if it's due to the former part of "it has been" that that
latter part of "to have him joined me" becomes wrong or odd.
I am sorry if you find my question strange, I really don't know what
my question is about? perhaps a grammar question or of idiom or usage.
Kevin in Hong Kong
Ian Jackson
<7191cc3b-5480-4e21...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Kevin <par...@gmail.com> writes
I believe that "join" is short for "to join". You could also say
"joining". It is more of a description of the situation rather than a
statement of what he did (if you see the difference!).
I think that it is always "join", regardless of the tense of the 'to be'
part.
"It is great to have him join me on the Learning Annex's wave of
success."
"It was great to have him join me on the Learning Annex's wave of
success."
"It would have been great to have him join me on the Learning Annex's
wave of success."
Etc.
They all seem correct to me.
--
Ian
Kevin
<ianREMOVETHISjack...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message
> <7191cc3b-5480-4e21-9ed4-3e135038f...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Kevin <paro...@gmail.com> writes
Many Thanks Ian!
I will try to understand your words about "It is more of a description
of the situation rather than a
statement of what he did".
Kevin
Pat Durkin
news:7191cc3b-5480-4e21...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
"To have" is used in the infinitive sense (unlimited by time), and, as
Ian posted, "join" is likewise an infinitive structure. Any tense or
time is indicated in the "be" form.
On the other hand, the participials "joined, joining" work, but that
takes a rewrite of the sentence.
His joining me on the...was (has been) great.
For him to have joined me...was great.
mm
wrote:
Join is not the only verb that works this way.
Have him see a doctor. Have him read the instructions.
Have him take a walk.
Have him look at the car.
Have him watch out for cars.
Have him rush the kicker.
Have him refinance.
Have him be happy.
Have them get married.
I think maybe any transitive verb and and maybe even every
intransitive verb will work this way.
--
Posters should say where they live, and for which area
they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in
Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
Kevin
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:13:00 -0800 (PST), Kevin <paro...@gmail.com>
I guessed many verbs work that way, just if they need to change to
past participle.
With thanks.
Kevin
Kevin
> "Kevin" <paro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Hi Pat -
I think I understand your examples, or I should say, if the sentence
carries a past participle of "joined", I would think it okay.
I just don't know why it did not.
I recall sentence like, "I heard he say", and wonder they are similar
things. As a non-native speaker of English, when I see the verb of
"heard", I always think that "say" should also be changed to "said",
but it did not.
Kevin
Kevin
>
> Many Thanks Ian!
> I will try to understand your words about "It is more of a description
> of the situation rather than a
> statement of what he did".
>
> Kevin
And, I wonder if this is an idiomatic issue, or a style issue, or a
grammar issue.
what if I say "I heard he said", is it wrong? or just odd but okay?
Kevin
mm
wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:13:00 -0800 (PST), Kevin <par...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Hello again -
>>
>>I have a puzzle about this sentence, "it has been great to have him
>>join me on the Learning Annex's wave of success."
>>I always see a structure of "to have him joined xxxxx" instead of " to
>>have him join xxxxx"
>>
>>I wonder if it's due to the former part of "it has been" that that
>>latter part of "to have him joined me" becomes wrong or odd.
>>
>>I am sorry if you find my question strange, I really don't know what
>>my question is about? perhaps a grammar question or of idiom or usage.
>>
>>Kevin in Hong Kong
>
>Join is not the only verb that works this way.
>
>Have him see a doctor. Have him read the instructions.
>Have him take a walk.
>Have him look at the car.
>Have him watch out for cars.
>Have him rush the kicker.
>Have him refinance.
>Have him be happy.
>Have them get married.
Maybe all these verbs and the OP's too are in the present subjnctive.
Have him refinance is a lot like May he refinance.
Kevin
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:02:58 -0500, mm <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:13:00 -0800 (PST), Kevin <paro...@gmail.com>
THANKS. This seems more understandable to me.
Kevin
Robert Lieblich
> THANKS. This seems more understandable to me.
Kevin -- Let's give this one more try.
The verb have/has combines with a past participle form to creat what
is often called the present perfect tense (I know, I know, it's a PAST
participle, but that's the terminology we use) or present perfect
aspect. "Have" functions as an auxiliary, and the verb phrase
consists of that auxiliary plus past the participle. So you get
things like "have eaten," "have spoken," "have "charged," and so on
with just about any past participle. This two-word verb phrase can
form a sentence when combined with a subject: "I have eaten," "You
have spoken," "We have charged. When the participle comes from a
transitive verb, you can have a direct object: "I have eaten dinner,"
You have spoken nonsense," "We have charged one hundred dollars on our
credit card." Adverb and adjective phrases can also follow the verb
in some cases.
But when you are talking about a verb phrase in which "have" is
followed by an infintive form, that's an entirely different
syntactical structure. In such sentences "have" has a meaning more
like "cause." "Have him see me" means "Cause him to see me." It's
not the present perfect tense, and it ordinarily requires a noun or
pronoun between "have" and the infinitive form that follows. "I will
have you thrown out of here." "I can have the package arrive
tomorrow." (= "I can cause the package to arrive tomorrow.") "I have
Gladys recite poetry whenever she comes to dinner."
It gets more complex, because you can vary the tenses in the latter
use, and different verbs take different complements. But that's the
basic idea.
--
Bob Lieblich
TMI?
Kevin
Thanks Bob.
I've got it. To put it simply, don't view "have" as an auxiliary, but
a verb meaning "cause".
Kevin
Pat Durkin
pronoun "that", (or what) and in your example it is incomplete. In a
dialog, the context would reveal which pronoun is intended.
I heard (that) he said (that) you could go. I heard he said you could
go. (Someone told me. I am repeating hearsay, or a rumor.)
Did you hear him say that?
Yes, I heard it. I heard him say that.
Well, really, George heard him say that and George told me.
Gearge heard what he said.
I heard what George said.
I heard what he said (through a third person, George).
I heard (that) he said (that) you could go.
People involved:
You
I
George
He.
And at this stage, dealing with my own language, mind you, I am just
going nuts, because, "heard" is the strangest spelling of a simple
sound! And I have written it so often!
But, really, "I heard him say that", in the dialog above leads us
back to the sequence of tenses in which the narrator "heard" another
person "to say", just as "have" another person "(to) join". Past
tense, and then infinitive*.
* Now that I have written that, I hold my breath, because I am hoping
that no one will now bring up the subjunctive. (I am only making a
small joke here!)
Pat Durkin
On Nov 29, 10:51 pm, "Pat Durkin" <durk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "Kevin" <paro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7191cc3b-5480-4e21...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Hello again -
>
> > I have a puzzle about this sentence, "it has been great to have
> > him
> > join me on the Learning Annex's wave of success."
> > I always see a structure of "to have him joined xxxxx" instead of
> > "
> > to
> > have him join xxxxx"
>
> > I wonder if it's due to the former part of "it has been" that that
> > latter part of "to have him joined me" becomes wrong or odd.
>
> > I am sorry if you find my question strange, I really don't know
> > what
> > my question is about? perhaps a grammar question or of idiom or
> > usage.
>
> "To have" is used in the infinitive sense (unlimited by time), and,
> as
> Ian posted, "join" is likewise an infinitive structure. Any tense or
> time is indicated in the "be" form.
>
> On the other hand, the participials "joined, joining" work, but that
> takes a rewrite of the sentence.
>
> His joining me on the...was (has been) great.
> For him to have joined me...was great.
Kevin:
Hi Pat -
I think I understand your examples, or I should say, if the sentence
carries a past participle of "joined", I would think it okay.
Pat:
The auxiliary verb, "to have" makes a complete verb with "joined". It
indicates a time or tense. "will have joined, was to have joined, had
joined", etc."
The independent verb "to have (cause, make to, require that, insist
that someone else do something" may be _related_ to the auxiliary verb
above, but in "having someone else join", it is a complete and
independent verb.
R. Lieblich's post (:31 after the hour yesterday) and your reply
indicate that you have understood the independent verb
Kevin:
>I just don't know why it did not.
Kevin:
I recall sentence like, "I heard he say", and wonder they are similar
things. As a non-native speaker of English, when I see the verb of
"heard", I always think that "say" should also be changed to "said",
but it did not.
Pat:
See my reply today aata :39 after the hour (just 13 minutes ago). The
difference between causing another to do something and hearing that he
said it is the difference between declarative and subjunctive
(imperative).
Bill McCray
>
>
> And at this stage, dealing with my own language, mind you, I am just
> going nuts, because, "heard" is the strangest spelling of a simple
> sound! And I have written it so often!
Beware of "heard", a dreadful word.
It looks like "beard", but sounds like "bird".
Bill in Kentucky
musika
Bill McCray <mccra...@springmind.com> typed:
Not in Wales
--
Ray
UK
Kevin
> "Kevin" <paro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Thanks a lot, I try to read it again to see if I could grasp your
words.
Now, I've got it that the word "that" is the key to I heard (that) he
said....without "that", I heard he say.
I am not 100% getting it, but will try to.
Kevin
Kevin
Thanks Pat!!
Pat Durkin
news:Yp-dnXAEP_nqvInW...@earthlink.com...
\Good one.
I used to assume "heard" was "heerd", past tense of "hear tell".
Well, for a short time I thought that way. It all depended upon who
was talking. How come no one ever said "her tell"?
Pat Durkin
No. Sorry. You might say "I heard him say." But that is back to the
infinitive. I heard him to say. (I understood him to say.)
Ian Jackson
<c7d607a2-95cd-4676...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
Kevin <par...@gmail.com> writes
>Now, I've got it that the word "that" is the key to I heard (that) he
>said....without "that", I heard he say.
>I am not 100% getting it, but will try to.
>
Kevin. Just a note about the conjunction "that" (which is not your
original question):
In English, we often omit the "that" - especially in colloquial speech.
However, there are times when it definitely sounds better (maybe more
formal?) to include the "that". I don't think "that" it is ever wrong to
include "that" (which I have done).
There are some examples here:
<http://www.englishforums.com/English/OmissionSubordinateConjunction/bhzh
h/post.htm>
Note that in many other European languages (for example, French), the
"that" can never be omitted. If you learn French, you soon remember to
remember "that" (if you see what I mean!).
Another problem in English is that [1] we often use "that" as an
alternative to "which" - but that is another argument.
[1] I have realised that this sentence is an example where "that" should
definitely be used - and similarly for THIS sentence. [Sorry. I could
continue for ever!]
--
Ian