Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    shabani is offline Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • Persian
      • Home Country:
      • Iran
      • Current Location:
      • Iran
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default having had to fund

    Hello everyone,

    I'm confused by this phrase. Can anyone please tell me why the writer didn't use"having to fund" in the following sentence?

    It is then protected against competitors benefiting by imitating the new product without having had to fund its development.


    It would make sense to me if it was past tense

  2. #2
    billmcd is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,505
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: having had to fund

    In your example, "without having to fund" is used as a projection and not as a completed action, whereas "having had to fund" is used to indicate that the funding was actually completed in the past.

  3. #3
    BobK's Avatar
    BobK is offline Harmless drudge
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    15,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: having had to fund

    Quote Originally Posted by shabani View Post
    Hello everyone,

    I'm confused by this phrase. Can anyone please tell me why the writer didn't use"having to fund" in the following sentence?

    It is then protected against competitors benefiting by imitating the new product without having had to fund its development.


    It would make sense to me if it was past tense
    I'm not sure what you mean by 'past tense'...? Are you calling 'having to fund' past tense?

    But tense isn't a crucial part of the meaning anyway. The inventor bears the costs of development added to any costs of actual production. The copycat benefits from only having production costs. What is important in the comparison is that the copycat goes straight to the production phase, without having had to fund the development (that is, without any need to make investment in it).

    b

Similar Threads

  1. [General] push for/ fund
    By vil in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24-May-2011, 10:43
  2. Use of fund
    By paris 06 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-Nov-2010, 11:23
  3. Fund
    By Nathan Mckane in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-Aug-2010, 20:36
  4. fund is welcome/d
    By Tan Elaine in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-Oct-2009, 02:26
  5. fund characteristics
    By higurashi in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 21-Feb-2006, 07:41

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •