whl626  +  21626 Fri, 06 Feb 04 12:19 PM This problem has been lingering in my mind for years. How to analyse it ? have = verb ? ( if have is verb, then ' to go ' is noun phrase and ' now ' is adverb ) ? If this is the case, then ' now' as an adverb can't modify a ' noun phrase ' but modify the have :p . That analysis is a little awkward then What do you think ? have to = auxiliary and go is the verb ? whl626 Joined on Sun, Aug 24 2003 Regular Member 882 Learn English every day Verbs, Nouns, Adverbs, Auxiliaries, Noun Phrases

	Pemmican  +  21640 Fri, 06 Feb 04 01:47 PM Just change it into "I must go" - then it's easier to analyze: "go" here is the full verb that is in its infinitive and follows the modal auxiliary must - without to! I have to go: "have to" is the substitute form for "must", "go" again is the full verb in its infinitive. "Have to" here is a fixed expression, and therefore "to" is actually part of the following infinitive form of the full verb, not a preposition. If it was a preposition, usually a Gerund would have to follow (as eg. in "I look forward to seeing you). To complete the analysis: "I" is the subject of the sentence, it's a personal pronoun. "have to go" is the predicate of the sentence which includes the inflected present tense form of "have" and the infinitive form of the full verb with "to". "now" is an adverbial of time. Hope that helped Pemmican Joined on Thu, Aug 21 2003 Westphalia, Germany Regular Member 569 Wâ mag ich mich nu vinden? wâ mac ich mich nu suochen, wâ? nu bin ich hie und bin ouch dâ und enbin doch weder dâ noch hie. wer wart ouch sus verirret ie?wer wart ie sus... Verbs, Prepositions, Tenses, Nouns, Pronouns, Auxiliaries, Present Tenses, Modals, Gerunds, Predicates, Modal Auxiliaries

	rommie  +  21641 Fri, 06 Feb 04 01:49 PM It's a matter of doing things in the right order. The noun phrase in "I have to go now" is "to go now", not merely "to go". Basically, "now" is an adverb, which modifies the verb "to go", and THEN, after having been so modified, the whole lot gets converted to single a noun phrase. Rommie rommie Joined on Mon, Jan 26 2004 Earth orbit Regular Member 606 Verbs, Nouns, Adverbs, Noun Phrases

	whl626  +  21686 Sat, 07 Feb 04 02:30 AM Just because ' have ' and ' to ' are always stuck together. So to say that ' have ' is the verb and ' to go now ' is the ' noun phrase ' means we break up the ' have ' and ' to ' for analysis. ? From Pem's point of view, if ' go ' is the verb, then ' have to ' is an auxilliary verb but it is not mentioned as such in any grammar book. That's why it baffles me :P whl626 Grammar, Verbs, Nouns, Noun Phrases

	Pemmican  +  21689 Sat, 07 Feb 04 02:40 AM >> From Pem's point of view, if ' go ' is the verb, then ' have to ' is an auxilliary verb but it is not mentioned as such in any grammar book. That's why it baffles me :P That's what I wanted to say - "have to" here is the substitute form for the auxiliary "must", it expresses necessity for the following full verb as well as must would do. It's the same as if you would use "to be able to" instead of "can". Pemmican Grammar, Verbs, Auxiliaries