adding ed

[jack]

He wants Bill to be killed.
Bill will not get killed.
She will not get killed.
He will get killed.


Why do i have to add ed to those present tense sentences? are they present perfect tense setences or just present tense?

 

[MikeNewYork]

He wants Bill to be killed.
Bill will not get killed.
She will not get killed.
He will get killed.


Why do i have to add ed to those present tense sentences? are they present perfect tense setences or just present tense?

The first sentence is present tense. The other three are future tense.
The tense of a sentence depends on the main verb. In all four sentences "killed" is the past participle of the verb "kill". In all four sentences, this participle is used to form the passive voice. This is formed by [from of "to be"] + past participle. "Get" is used to replace the "to be" form (informal use).

The active voice infinitive of "kill" is "to kill".
The passive voice infinitve of "kill" is "to be killed" (to get killed).

He gets killed (he is killed). [present tense, passive voice]
He got killed (he was killed). [past tense, passive voice]
He will get killed (he will be killed). [future tense, passive voice]

 

[jack]

why can't i say:
"Bill needs to be kill."


doesnt adding ed to killed make it past tense?

 

[MikeNewYork]

why can't i say:
"Bill needs to be kill."


doesnt adding ed to killed make it past tense?

You can't say "to be kill" because a passive infinitive can only be formed with the past partciple of a verb. "Killed" is the past participle of "kill".

The verb "kill" is regular.
present tense/infinitive": kill
past tense: killed
past participle: killed

More about passive voice here:

http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/passive.htm

 

[jack]

You have killed him
I cannot believe this. <-- why not believed? What kind of sentence is this, like is it a present perfect?
I have believed you. <---this one have ed? is it b/c it is a present perfect?

 

[Tdol]

I cannot believe this = present tense. Can + bare infinitive.

I have believed you- this would not work here. This means that the believing is in the past, not now. ;-)

 

[jack]

I have believed you- this would not work here. This means that the believing is in the past, not now. ;-)

I have believed you <-- why doesn't the believing means it is believed in the past and it is still being believed? b/c that sturcture a present perfect?

 

[Tdol]

I have believed you = in the past, but probably no more. ;-)

 

[jack]

I was supposed to woke up at 8. <---why can't i use woke? i am talking about a past event?
I was supposed to wake up at 8. <---why is wake correct?


Can you kill bill? <--correct?
or is it
Can you killed bill? <--correct?
why?

Does Bill needs to be killed? <--correct?
or is it?
Does Bill needs to be kill? <--correct?
Why??

"i wanted to sat down" I know the 2nd one is correct. What kind of error is the first one? Like is it a subject verb agreement or verb form or something, so i can look this up and read more about how to use it?
"I wanted to sit down."

 

[MikeNewYork]

I was supposed to woke up at 8. <---why can't i use woke? i am talking about a past event?
I was supposed to wake up at 8. <---why is wake correct?

In that construction "wake" is an infinitive. As such, it has no past tense form.

Can you kill bill? <--correct?
or is it
Can you killed bill? <--correct?
why?

Gain, following an auxiliary verb, such as "can", we use the base/infinitive form of the verb. "Kill" is correct.

Does Bill needs to be killed? <--correct?
or is it?
Does Bill needs to be kill? <--correct?
Why??

Does Bill need to be killed? We don't add an "s" after verbs used with the auxiliary "does". Use the base form.

"To be killed" is a passive infinitive. The passive voice requires A form of "to be" + the past participle of the verb, which is "killed".

"i wanted to sat down" I know the 2nd one is correct. What kind of error is the first one? Like is it a subject verb agreement or verb form or something, so i can look this up and read more about how to use it?
"I wanted to sit down."

Again, "to sit" is an infinitive. That uses the base form of the verb. "Wanted" is past tense; we don't change the base form in a regular infinitive. :wink:

 

[jack]

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i change my mind." <--correct used of ed? and what does this sentence mean?

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i changed my mind." <--correct used of ed? and what does this sentence mean?


"I will not need anything published in the bulletin." <---is "published" used correctly? what does the sentence mean?

"I will not need anything publish in the bulletin." <---is "publish" used correctly? what does the sentence mean?

"I will need that publish."
"I will need that published."
what is the diference between the two in meaing?

 

[Tdol]

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i change my mind." <--correct used of ed? and what does this sentence mean? It means that the person has chosen a course, but accepts the possibility that they may wish to choose another. In other words, they are not 1000% sure that this is the ideal course for them.

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i changed my mind." Incorrect

"I will not need anything published in the bulletin." <---is "published" used correctly? what does the sentence mean? Correct- it means 'that is published'

"I will not need anything publish in the bulletin." Incorrect

"I will need that publish." Incorrect
"I will need that published." = 'to be published'

 

[jack]

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i changed my mind." <--why is changed wrong?, why isn't it a "to be" form?


"I will need that published." = 'to be published' <---how is it a "to be" form? Is it like, "I need him killed immediately." ?[/b]

 

[Tdol]

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i changed my mind." <--why is changed wrong?, why isn't it a "to be" form?

The 'to be'form is a passive- you change your own mind- so it's active and the past tense, which is what it is, doesn't work. It makes no sense to say 'my mind needs to be changed'. ;-)

"I will need that published." = 'to be published' <---how is it a "to be" form? Is it like, "I need him killed immediately." ?[/b] Yes.

:lol:

 

[MikeNewYork]

"This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless i changed my mind." <--why is changed wrong?, why isn't it a "to be" form?


"I will need that published." = 'to be published' <---how is it a "to be" form? Is it like, "I need him killed immediately." ?[/b]

The tenses in the first sentence are present tense ("am going to take" = present with a future meaning). The verb "changed" is in the past tense. That doesn't make sense. If one has already "changed" one's mind, then the present and future meanings no longer make sense. It should be:

This is the program that I am going to take at Uvic unless I change my mind.

The verb "need" takes an infinitive or a gerund as a complement:

The car needs to be washed.
The car needs washing.

When need has a noun or pronoun as its direct object, then the object can be followed by a participle (used as an adjective) or a passive infinitive "to be + participle).

I need him killed. I need him to be killed.
I need it published. I need it to be published.
I need it working. I need it to be working.
I need him tending bar. I need him to be tending bar.

 

[jack]

"Why couldn't you shoot him?" <--correct? why?
"Why couldn't you shot him?" <--incorrect? why?

 

[MikeNewYork]

"Why couldn't you shoot him?" <--correct? why?
"Why couldn't you shot him?" <--incorrect? why?

"Shot" is incorrect because we use the base/infinitive form after auxiliary verbs, such as "could". :wink:

 

[jack]

"My signal srength is rather messed up." <--correct? why?
"My signal srength is rather mess up." <--incorrect? why

"The time is messed up." <---right? why?
"The time is mess up." <--incorrect? why?

"Let me get a clear shoot of him." <--correct? why?
"Let me get a clear shot of him." <--incorrect? why?



"I was supposed to woke up at 8. <---why can't i use woke? i am talking about a past event?
I was supposed to wake up at 8. <---why is wake correct?


In that construction "wake" is an infinitive. As such, it has no past tense form."

Sorry, i still don't really get this. Why is it correct to use wake and incorrect to use woke?" I am taking past tense so why can't i use woke? Why use wake when i am talking past tense?






"Bill is killed." <--why is it incorrect if i use "kill"?

 

[Tdol]

The first two are right- you use the past participle because they are passive constructions, using be + past participle. The third should be 'shot' which is the noun referring to the act of firing a gun, rather than 'shoot', which, as a noun, means to get together to fire guns at birds or something all day.

After 'to' the verb doesn't change:

I like to wake up late.
I like to wake up late.

The first verb shows the tesne. Infinitives don't have a past form.;-)

 

[jack]

"Let me get a clear shoot of him."
"Let me get a clear shot of him."
Can you explain to me again about what is the difference in meaning between the two?