Is it alright?

[hoangkha]

Dear teachers!
- We had had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.
Is it alright to use the past perfect tense twice in this sentence?

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, but that's a run-on sentence. (And "all right" is two words, not one.)

 

[TheParser]

- We had had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.
Is it alright to use the past perfect tense twice in this sentence?

NOT A TEACHER


(1) I most respectfully suggest the first use of the past perfect in your sentence is

either "wrong" or (at the very least) unnecessary.

(2) The past perfect is usually used to describe something that happened before

something else happened.

(a) In your sentence, you had given us the mechanic's number on Monday.

(b) Then, we had the car repaired on Tuesday.

(3) Compare with this sentence:

Why did we have our car repaired by a bad mechanic on Monday? Well, we had had

it repaired on Monday before you told us on Tuesday about your good mechanic, so

it was too late for us to take our car to your recommended mechanic.

 

[hoangkha]

Yes, but that's a run-on sentence. (And "all right" is two words, not one.)

Thank Mr.SoothingDave!
But all right = alright
alright - Definition and pronunciation | Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com

 

[5jj]

But all right = alright
alright - Definition and pronunciation | Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com

From that link: "Some people consider that this form should not be used in formal writing."

 

[Barb_D]

BTW, I agree with The Parser. There is no call for the past perfect in the first part of the sentence.

 

[hoangkha]

Thank you all!
My question comes from this sentence.
- Having our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us,we continued our journey.
The key is Having had our instead of Having our .
Is the key incorrect then?

 

[5jj]

You are now asking about a different sentence. The sentence you have now given is correct with 'having had' - but that's not past perfect.

 

[bhaisahab]

Thank you all!
My question comes from this sentence.
- Having our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us,we continued our journey.
The key is Having had our instead of Having our .
Is the key incorrect then?

Why didn't you post the full, correct sentence in the first post?

 

[hoangkha]

I can't understand.
I have been taught that
Ex:
a- We had had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.(In your opinions, it is incorrect)
reduced
b- Having had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.

and we can use presen participle instead of perfect participle to indicate the first act if it and the second one happened successively.
- Having had enough, he left the table.= Having enough, he left the table.
but if the first happened for a long time before the second , perfect participle must be used
- Having failed twice, he didn't want to try again.
So I think it should be
c- We had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.
reduced
d- Having our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.
because "We had our car repaired " and "we continued our journey" happened successively. Besides, we also need to distinguish between "We had our car repaired " and "whose telephone number you had given us".
and I think D is also reasonable.

 

[5jj]

We had had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.(In your opinions, it is incorrect)
If we insert 'and' before 'we continued', 'we had had' is acceptable, but 'we had' is sufficient.

reduced
b- Having had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.:tick:

and we can use a present participle instead of a perfect participle to indicate the first act if it and the second one happened successively.
- Having had enough, he left the table.= Having enough, he left the table.
I think that 'having had' is better unless the finishing and leaving are simultaneous. Even then, I prefer 'having had'.
but if the first happened for a long time before the second , a/the perfect participle must be used
- Having failed twice, he didn't want to try again.:tick:
So I think it should be
c- We had our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, and we continued our journey. Fine

reduced
d- Having our car repaired by the mechanic whose telephone number you had given us, we continued our journey.
because "We had our car repaired " and "we continued our journey" happened successively. - and so 'having had is better.

5

 

[Raymott]

From that link: "Some people consider that this form should not be used in formal writing."

That feeling doesn't seem to be shared much in Australia. 'Alright' has been alright here for as long as I can remember, and I've used it in university English assignments without even a hint of red ink on my marked paper.
Is there really any difference from other words derived from "all" plus another word to make an adverb: "all ready - already"; "all together - altogether"; "all ways - always"; and perhaps back to "all though - although"?
I can't think of a good objection to it for formal writing that doesn't also apply to "all right".

 

[birdeen's call]

I have never heard of "alright" being objectionable. I actually thought it was better than "all right". Thanks to all who have posted.

 

[birdeen's call]

Everything seems to indicate that the feeling against "alright" is much stronger in America than in Great Britain and Australia.

1. SD says it's "all right". Raymott says "alright" is fine.
2. The AHD says "alright" is non-standard. Collins English Dictionary calls it a variant, "considered by many people to be wrong or less acceptable than all right".
3. BNC: "all right" -- 637, "alright" -- 8329; COCA: "all right" -- 61894, "alright" -- 1913.
4. This thread.

 

[emsr2d2]

My parents, grandparents and teachers would have marked "all right" in red when I was a child. In fact, I distinctly remember another pupil in my class using "It was all right" and the teacher writing next to it in large red letters "No. It was half left". I was taught to use "alright".