be going to V vs. be going to be Ving

[Yurui Liu]

Is it okay to say the following?

A: Who is going to be delivering the speech?
B: John.

I'm wondering whether "who is going to be delivering..." is correct.

Should I use "Who is going to deliver the speech?" instead?

I have no problems with the following, though:

C: I'm going to be covering for Peter for a week.

Here, "be going to be covering" is justified because it
implies the action is temporary.

I'd appreciate your help.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 8:34:08 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:

> Is it okay to say the following?
>
> A: Who is going to be delivering the speech?
> B: John.

Yes.

> I'm wondering whether "who is going to be delivering..." is correct.
>
> Should I use "Who is going to deliver the speech?" instead?

If you want to be more formal.

[grammar...@gmail.com]

I agree with PTD, but it's interesting to put the sentences
into the passive voice. There, the choice seems clear. :)

active: John is going to deliver the speech.
passive: The speech is going to be delivered by John.

active: John is going to be delivering the speech.
passive: (?) The speech is going to be being delivered by John.

[David Kleinecke]

You (?) example is clumsy and inelegant but grammatical. It
works a little better with "will" instead of "going to":
The speech will be being delivered by John
There should be a context where something else is going on at
the same time.

[Mark Brader]

Yurui Liu:

> Is it okay to say the following?
>
> A: Who is going to be delivering the speech?
> B: John.
>
> I'm wondering whether "who is going to be delivering..." is correct.
>
> Should I use "Who is going to deliver the speech?" instead?

Correct either way.
--
Mark Brader | "Unless developers are careful, good software
Toronto | attracts so many improvements that it eventually
m...@vex.net | rolls over and sinks..." --Ben & Peter Laurie

[Peter Bennett]

I think you have a spurious "being" there.

I'd prefer "the speech will be delivered by John."

--
Peter Bennett, VE7CEI Vancouver BC
peterbb (at) telus.net
Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vpsboat.com

[grammar...@gmail.com]

What would you do if you wanted to make that passive sentence progressive?

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, 07 Nov 2016 05:34:06 -0800, Yurui Liu wrote:

> Is it okay to say the following?
>
> A: Who is going to be delivering the speech?
> B: John.
>
> I'm wondering whether "who is going to be delivering..." is correct.

It's not overtly incorrect, but absent clear context it seems strange.
The progressive aspect is used to show action as continuing; there is
not, for me, any obvious reason one would want to cast the sentence that
way, unless some had previously said something like "I guess that by 3
p.m. we'll find ourselves in the middle of someone's speech." Else the
simple, normal way of casting the thought would be, as you suggest, "Who

is going to deliver the speech?"

> C: I'm going to be covering for Peter for a week.
>
> Here, "be going to be covering" is justified because it implies the
> action is temporary.

Yes, but not exactly for that reason. It is correct because it addresses
a future time during which the action in question will be going forth on
a continuing basis. "I'm going to be working in my garden all Saturday
afternoon."

[Yurui Liu]

Eric Walker於 2016年11月8日星期二 UTC+8上午10時42分11秒寫道：

Compare "I'm going to be working in my garden all Saturday afternoon"
with the simple "I'm going to work in my garden all Saturday
afternoon" as a reply to "Any plans for Saturday?".

Isn't it the case that the former implies that the speaker
does not usually work in his garden all Saturday afternoon, and the
latter does not carry that implication?

[Liz]

On Nov 7, 2016, Yurui Liu wrote
(in article<c3cd8691-bee1-4e49...@googlegroups.com>):

> I have no problems with the following, though:
>
> C: I'm going to be covering for Peter for a week.
>
> Here, "be going to be covering" is justified because it
> implies the action is temporary.

How’s about:

Peter’s on sick leave. I'm covering his week off.

Peter will be taking a week off, so I’ll be covering for him.