Forum newsfeeds
Forum Newsfeeds


Sites for Teachers

Sites for Teachers


Go Back   UsingEnglish.com ESL Forum > Learning English > Ask a Teacher

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 16-Sep-2004, 23:30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default Have had

Are these correct and what do they mean?

1. You guys should have had this guy killed.
2. You guys should have had killed him.
3. You guys should have killed him.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 17-Sep-2004, 02:19
Steven D's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: U.S.A.
Posts: 835
First Language: English
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Steven D is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Have had

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack
Are these correct and what do they mean?

1. You guys should have had this guy killed.
2. You guys should have had killed him.
3. You guys should have killed him.

Sentence number two is not correct.

1. You guys should have had this guy killed. - This means it was advisable for "you guys" to hire someone to kill "this guy", but "you guys" didn't for some reason. It could also mean that it was a good idea - advisable - for you guys to ask someone to kill "this guy". It doesn't have to mean that "you guys" had to hire someone. "You guys" could have asked someone from within the "organization" to kill "this guy". Someone from within the "organization" would already be on the payroll, so "you guys" wouldn't have had to hire someone to kill "this guy".

3. You guys should have killed him. - This means that it was advisable, or a good idea, for "you guys" to kill "him", but for some reason "you guys" didn't do it.


2. You guys should have had killed him. - This is not correct.

to have "someone" do something - Here, "have" is being used as a causative verb. It is used with the past modal form "should have + past participle". In this case the past participle is "had", which is also the verb. The object pronoun "him" should follow "had".

should have had him killed

Here's another example so that you can compare.

Your car is going to cost more money to fix now. You should have had it checked out as soon as you thought something was wrong.

You should have had it checked out. - correct

You should have had checked it out. - not correct

Here, the object pronoun also has to follow the causative verb "had", which is a past participle following "should have" - should have had it checked out
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 17-Sep-2004, 03:09
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 18-Sep-2004, 21:23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default

Are these correct? If not, why?

1. I have heard people say that.
2. I have heard people saying that.
3. I have heard people said that.
What do these mean?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 22-Sep-2004, 07:30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default

Are these correct? If not, why? What does it mean?


1. I have dry skin.
2. I have dried skin. (If it is incorrect, why no present perfect here?)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 22-Sep-2004, 08:42
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Thanks: 0
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack
Are these correct? If not, why? What does it mean?


1. I have dry skin.
2. I have dried skin. (If it is incorrect, why no present perfect here?)
In other words,

1. My skin is dry, as opposed to moist. :D
2. My skin has been dried by a process.

Note that, for example, meat is dried, giving dried meat. The skin of an animal can be dried, too, giving dried skin (i.e., a dried pelt), but human skin is 'dry'; if dried (i.e., dried out of its moisture) it means, the skin is no longer living). :wink:

All the best, 8)
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 22-Sep-2004, 09:10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default


Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 22-Sep-2004, 09:30
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Thanks: 0
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default

You're welcome. :D
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 30-Sep-2004, 07:09
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,344
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
jack
Default

Are these correct? What do they mean?

1. I have never had make up since
2. I had never had make up since.
3. I had never have make up since.
4. I have never have make up since.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 30-Sep-2004, 10:57
Casiopea's Avatar
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,997
Current Location: China
First Language: English
Thanks: 0
Thanked 35 Times in 35 Posts
Casiopea is on a distinguished road
Default

1. I have never had make-up since. :D (present perfect)
2. I had never had make-up since. :D (past perfect)

3. I had never have make-up since. :(
4. I have never have make-up since. :(

Note, make up is a verb; make-up is a noun. :wink:

All the best, :D
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
had

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 17:06.


vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5
Copyright © 2002 - 2008 UsingEnglish.com