Since I'm the one who's asking favour from you, I'll try to make it as easy as I can for you to answer my questions. Double quotes are not supported by this forum engine, though I've done it several times before by quoting the former posts and inserting the quotes into another quotes, etc., but this method is extremely time-consuming, especially when the browser crashes during the procedure, as it happened to me when I wrote that mile-long post. So I'll basically (but not fully and entirely) copy my former post here (that mile-long one ), but NOT because of arrogance or being meticulous or something, but in order to make things easier, and to avoid unnecessary quotes. I'm going to use pink for my current questions, notes, etc., and I'm also going to number my points to make them easy to refer to.
I (Mav) in black (as night, black as cole :D ) in the parts which are recycled from my former posts, but now in pink; Raymott in blue, as usual.
So, here we go:
1.b) Consider this (let's say it's a narrative): "He was strong enough (Back then, in those years being strong was one of his peculiarities) to have beaten up (referring to a former event) that rascal who had attacked his family a week ago (before the narrative point). Is it correct? I would still like to know whether it (and the whole sentence) is correct or not. I tried so hard, I tried to put it into context, so "I think I'm entitled to know the truth" about my sentence.:) I could handle it.:)
2.b) OR "He had turned angry enough to have killed if he had been pushed much further.”?
2.c) OR "He had turned angry enough to kill if he had been pushed much further.
Acording to your last post(s), is it just a "a matter of style"?
2.d) In this latter example I could imagine something like: "Eventually he calmed down, but it was surprising as he had (sooner) turned angry enough to have killed if he had been pushed much further.” Is it correct? (I tried to put it into some context.) Am I right about this?
3.a) Now there's something I wanted to ask you after your penultimate post... I realize it's a multiple use of the Past Perfect, but one of them is only technically Past Perfect, since it functions as the 'if-part' of the 3rd conditional, so it's not really more than once instance of the past perfect, at least in my humble opinion. Or how's that?
had(without 'had'; simple past) started to have written, I would never have posted Mr. Fowler's notes. ("If I 'had known'..." is necessary due to the 3rd conditional, thus it's not a real Past Perfect, though technically it is.)
4.b) If I say "He was to have been spared, but he was roasted in the electric chair" then I think it's the brute truth that makes things clear, not the infinitive, so to speak. Was I correct about it? Y/N)
//I got a 'nice' message from the forum engine: "The text that you have entered is too long (10058 characters). Please shorten it to 10000 characters long", so I had to cut it short.
I wrote a sentence by Shakespeare in my previous post: "I had thought, Sir, to have held my peace." Does it convey that he couldn't hold his peace? Or would it be correct (without changing the meaning, of course!!) to replace it with "I had thought, Sir, to hold my peace."? 5.a) I THINK it would be correct. The Past Perfect already implies antecedence, there's no need for the Perfect Infinitive. (Am I correct about it? Y/N) What's the difference? 5.b) Style, and four centuries? Y/N ;)
6.b) Would it change the meaning if you used Present Infinitive: “Well, over the last week, he has turned angry enough to kill this man yesterday.” In this latter case, I'd think he killed that man. ???
How often is the Perfect Infinitive used among the native English speakers? I only very seldom come across with it, and maybe (only maybe) because the Present Infinitive holds its sway, and for a reason, I think.