"had intended to visit" and "intended to have visited"

[YAMATO2201]

1) I had intended to visit London last year.

2) I intended to have visited London last year.

Are these sentences of mine correct?

 

[YAMATO2201]

They are both grammatical.

Do you think #1 is much more common than #2?

 

[YAMATO2201]

Is the following sentence natural in speech?

3) I was to have visited London last year.

 

[tedmc]

Is the following sentence natural in speech?

3) I was to have visited London last year.

"Was" is used to in place of "intended/meant". It means the same thing.

 

[GoesStation]

Is the following sentence natural in speech?

3) I was to have visited London last year.

It's rather formal. In spoken American English, I'd expect "I was supposed to have visited London last year."

 

[Phaedrus]

1 - At some past time prior to a later past time/event, the speaker had intended to visit Paris last year.
2 - At some past time the speaker intended that a visit to Paris would be one of his accomplishments last year.

There is little significant difference in meaning. The first is probably more likely.

I understand both sentences as equivalent to "I meant to visit London last year," the perfect indicating that the speaker did not actually visit London last year.

 

[jutfrank]

1 - At some past time prior to a later past time/event, the speaker had intended to visit Paris last year.
2 - At some past time the speaker intended that a visit to Paris would be one of his accomplishments last year.

There is little significant difference in meaning. The first is probably more likely.

I agree with Piscean's interpretations here but I would say they have significantly different meanings/uses. 2 is much less likely.

 

[Phaedrus]

I agree with Piscean's interpretations here but I would say they have significantly different meanings/uses. 2 is much less likely.

I think it's important to be aware that "to have visited" in "I intended to have visited London last year" doesn't indicate a past time previous to the past time of "intended." The proof of that is that we can't say things like "[strike]I intend to have visited London last year[/strike]" where "intend" is in the present. One can't intend things about the past, whether the intending spoken of occurred in the past or occurs in the present.

Consequently, the perfect infinitive ("to have visited") must not be functioning to indicate past time, or an earlier past time relative to a later past time. I maintain that, instead, it is functioning to indicate that the intention was not realized. Notice that we can say, "I intended to visit London last year, and I did", just as we can say, "I intend to visit London next year, and I shall", but we (surely) can't say, *? "I intended to have visited London last year, and I did."

With "I had intended to visit London last year," I think two interpretations are possible, one being the interpretation Piscean gave. Let's change "last year" to "yesterday": "I had intended to visit London yesterday." Piscean's interpretation works in contexts like this: "I had intended to visit London yesterday, but then I decided to do something else." But suppose the speaker's intention didn't change. Then, I believe, "had intended" indicates that the planned visit to London didn't occur.

Can we say, *? "I had intended to visit London yesterday, and I did." I don't think so.

 

[jutfrank]

Consequently, the perfect infinitive ("to have visited") must not be functioning to indicate past time, or an earlier past time relative to a later past time.

Right. It's a prospective looking-forward from the moment of intending.

I maintain that, instead, it is functioning to indicate that the intention was not realized.

If there is an interpretation of 'not realized', I'd say it comes primarily from the semantic of selecting intended, not from the perfect infinitive. It's like how we use the verb try to imply failure. I tried to call you ( = but I didn't). We don't need I tried to have called you.

When I try to make sense of the sentence, I'm thinking: I intended to have visited London [by a certain point in time] last year. That is, I had a deadline before which I wanted to accomplish visiting London, and either this intending happened last year or the deadline was the end point of the year. I suppose that's possible, but very unlikely, unclear and very uncomfortable.

Let's remember that this is not an authentic sentence, so there's little meaning in trying to interpret it.

 

[YAMATO2201]

Which of the following two sentences is natural in speech?

1) He expects/hopes to have finished by June.

2) He expects/hopes that he will have finished by June.

(Quoted from 実例英文法 by A. J. Thomson and A. V. Martinet)

 

[Raymott]

1. is probably more common. But most people would say 3. "He expects/hopes to finish by June." While this isn't strictly the same thing, in most conversations it would suffice.

 

[jutfrank]

Which of the following two sentences is natural in speech?

1) He expects/hopes to have finished by June.

2) He expects/hopes that he will have finished by June.

1) Both are very natural.
2) Both are natural but not as likely as 1).

Remember that hope and expect do not have identical uses. expect works a bit more naturally with the perfect infinitive since it focuses more on outcomes, which is the main focus of meaning in this example.

You could also say:

He hopes/expects to be finished by June.

which is better than

He hopes/expects to finish by June.

since the focus is more on the outcome. (That is, what has been accomplished by a certain point in future time.)