We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!
Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com
This question is Not Answered
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
+
212711
Wed, 05 Apr 06 05:58 PM
Just trying to get my head around this long verb phrase; can anyone help me break it down into its elements?
Working backwards, I can see that "have been eating" is the present perfect continuous form.
Presumably, the preceding "had to" is just a periphrastic modal meaning the same as "must".
What, then, is the "would have" element? A conditional modal? But if so, it surely wouldn't fit the ordererd pattern for verb groups: MODAL, PERFECT (have), PROGRESSIVE (be), PASSIVE (be), MAIN VERB, because "had to" is a modal as well. And you can't have two modals, in a verb group, surely? Also, where (in the above pattern) does the "have" that follows "would" fit in?
Many thanks for your time.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randy_Tam
+
213727
Sun, 09 Apr 06 09:05 AM
I presume that you have gone onto the wrong track. There literally exist 2 verb phrases here. What I mean is that one is given 'inflection' (ie. Subject Agreement + Tense + Aspect) and the other only given 'Tense' (and all that goes with it: Tense, Agreement with Object, etc.)
To make it down to earth, the phrase (actually the entire Agreement Phrase, SPEC exclusive), disregarding peculiarities in tense and aspect assignment, resembles: have to eat. What appears 'larger' is not the semantic features of the Verb Phrase, but actually the functional features of it. I would illustrate the 'mega phrase' this way (Move and Merge are ignored, for simplicity's sake. Only spelt out product is considered):
[ Agr P [SPEC omitted] [Agr' [Agr, Mood: conditional, Aspect: perfect] [VP would have had] [TP [T to, Aspect: Perfective, Progressive] [VP have been eating]]
Where the Main Verb 'have' (represented as 'had' in the VP shell) takes a TP as its obligatory complement.
I don't think 'have to' is a modal verb, but closer to a Main Verb taking TP as an obligatory complement, because in modal verbs, tense is usually covert (save 'can').
Joined on
Fri, Dec 9 2005
New Member
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip
+
218757
Sat, 22 Apr 06 04:37 PM
 Anonymous wrote: | |
Just trying to get my head around this long verb phrase; can anyone help me break it down into its elements?
Working backwards, I can see that "have been eating" is the present perfect continuous form.
Presumably, the preceding "had to" is just a periphrastic modal meaning the same as "must".
What, then, is the "would have" element? A conditional modal? But if so, it surely wouldn't fit the ordererd pattern for verb groups: MODAL, PERFECT (have), PROGRESSIVE (be), PASSIVE (be), MAIN VERB, because "had to" is a modal as well. And you can't have two modals, in a verb group, surely? Also, where (in the above pattern) does the "have" that follows "would" fit in?
Many thanks for your time.
Alex
|
|
Simply put, it's just "too much verb". Simplify it to "he would have had to be eating" or "he would have to have been eating" and I think you'll be able to identify the elements more easily. My first example certainly flows better off my tongue than the second one.
Joined on
Thu, Jun 23 2005
Veteran Member
8,733
At reise er at leve! - H. C. Andersen
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous,
2 yr 105 days ago
hi, Im Sandy, and im learning english, im from mexico, in my class we are trying to understand how to use "would have had" and when i have to use it, can you help me to resolve this question??? thank you so much...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CalifJim
+
402975
Fri, 10 Aug 07 10:26 PM
Alex,
Here's the mistake.
| because "had to" is a modal as well |
|
It's sometimes called a 'semi-modal', because it is like the modal must in meaning. Nevertheless, its grammar is exactly the same as for any non-modal verb, like want, like, or prefer.
would have wanted to have seen
would have liked to have been invited
would have preferred to have been lying on a beach
would have + [past participle] Modal perfect tense.
had Past participle of to have. The 'lexical' verb of the whole verb phrase.
to have been eating. Infinitive. Specifically, the perfect progressive infinitive.
CJ
Joined on
Mon, Aug 2 2004
California
Veteran Member
22,385
"There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous,
2 yr 63 days ago
I'm curious about how this phrasing: "would have had to have been," differs from the phrasing: "would have to have been." I know that the additional "had" changes the sentence in some form or another, but I can't quite figure out how--or what different meanings the two phrases carry.
Could you provide an explanation and an example of how two similarly worded independent clauses would differ--both in form and meaning--if one were used rather than the other?
|
|
|
|
|
|
English Toolbox Co.
+
424883
Fri, 28 Sep 07 07:42 PM
It would seem that you'd use the past perfect form "had to" when the action preceded another action. Example: "The movie started at 8:00, but my stupid brother-in-law booked a table in a restaurant for 7:00. To get to the movie on time, we would have had to have been eating at 7:00, not just sitting down at our table." Here, the eating precedes seeing the movie.
In the case of "would have to have been," it seems that this follows another action rather than precedes it. Example: "You would have to have been a fool to invest in internet stocks after the crash in 2001." Here, the crash comes first and the investing second.
I'm confident someone will point out any errors in my reasoning... . ![Big Smile [:D]](/emoticons/emotion-2.gif)
Joined on
Thu, Aug 16 2007
New Member
41
Happy Teaching! The English Toolbox Co. Staff
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous,
1 yr 290 days ago
Hi there, Anyone help me about use of have had and world/should/could/might have had. Thanks,
Anonymous,
1 yr 184 days ago
"Simply put, it's just "too much verb". Simplify
it to "he would have had to be eating" or "he would have to have been
eating" and I think you'll be able to identify the elements more
easily. My first example certainly flows better off my tongue than the second one."I think examples of answers, as mentioned above, are misleading and confusing. I would prefer to use a clasical approach for your answer...for example: One could rather say, " he had most likely/probably been eating when he vomited" ("he would have had to be eating") or "he must have been eating if he vomited".("he would have to have been
eating").The Enlish Lord has Spoken
|