Why 'have had' or 'had had'?

1 2 3
   Share on Facebook  
Anonymous  #161001  Mon, 21 Nov 05 10:00 AM

I agree with JTT. It's just poor English; must be something new they're teaching in school. The phrase 'had had' is just a written stutter and poor practice.

You can 'have had' or 'has had', but never had had.

"I realized that I had it in my pocket all along."

Accomplishes the same thing, but in a clearer manner. It's in my pocket regardless of the time I put it there, which was earlier today, which can be construed by the word 'realized' and confirmed by 'all along'. It's there now, since nothing in the sentence ever stated that I have removed it, it has been in there a while, and will continue to be in there until I remove it.

If you want to convey the past, use have or has with had, or just plain had will do.

  
CalifJim  #161689  Wed, 23 Nov 05 06:39 AM
You can 'have had' or 'has had', but never had had.


Sorry, Anonymous.  That is completely wrong.  "had had" is a completely legitimate combination.

CJ
  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004
California
Veteran Member (17,568)
ModeratorProficient Speaker
"There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche
Anonymous  #163671  Mon, 28 Nov 05 06:46 AM

Haha - The new generation changing the rules since the old ones don't suit them anymore.

 Please point me in the direction of any older well know writer or author that has published a novel or educational text with any excerpt of 'had had' in it. I'm not talking about someone new like Rowling (of Harry Potter fame), but someone who has been around the block a bit. I'll bet that Clancy, King, Tolkien, Koontz, and several others would be appalled at the thought of 'had had-ing' something! Wink [;)]

  
1 2 3
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL General English Grammar Questions
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service