ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: To have

Clive — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:28:16 GMT

Hi Kilimanjaro,

Welcome to the Forum.

Clive

Re: To have

Kilimanjaro — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:03:55 GMT

Clive wrote:

Hi,

But if it were the future, would you not say something like this?

He hopes to be the first man to climb Everest.

or He is the first man to attempt to climb Everest.

Best wishes, Clive

Hi Clive,

By the way,I'm a newcomer in the forum.

the sentence when it stands alone is confusing,though, with a context like the one you give it sounds more plausible Clive.

Kilimanjaro

Re: To have

Clive — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:55:55 GMT

Hi,

But if it were the future, would you not say something like this?

He hopes to be the first man to climb Everest.

or He is the first man to attempt to climb Everest.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: To have

Kilimanjaro — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:28:12 GMT

Clive wrote:

He is the first man to climb Everest. I'd certainly have said this in 1954.

Isn't this a bit redolent of future reference, in that it may come to mean a fixed plan to be implemented ahead, regarding the subject "He" doesn't necessarily refer to Edmond Hillary? One can possibily conclude equivocal connotations. am I wrong?

Re: To have

Clive — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:45:36 GMT

Hi guys,

As Jim says, different people may see slight differences here.

Hillary climbed Everest in 1953.

He is the first man to climb Everest. I'd certainly have said this in 1954.

He is the first man to have climbed Everest. I think I'd say this now, in 2005. It seems to plant the achievement more clearly in the past. Or alternatively, I might say 'He was the first man to climb Everest.'

Best wishes, Clive

Re: To have

CalifJim — Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:05:59 GMT

It's "Everest" or "Mount Everest", not "the Everest".

"first man to climb Everest" and "first man to have climbed Everest" are both correct grammatically, and they both mean the same thing. Speakers will differ as to whether they believe there is some slight difference in meaning. "to have climbed" has slightly more emphasis on the accomplishment, even the pride of such an accomplishment, in my opinion. But the difference is nearly insignificant.

"first man to climb" has the advantage of being less wordy, more direct. I would personally use "to climb" because I see no particular reason to use the alternate form.

CJ

Re: To have

Diamondrg — Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:39:02 GMT

so Califjim. what's your answer? is the first man to have climbed the Everest ... possible? if yes, what is the difference in meaning?

Re: To have

CalifJim — Sun, 04 Dec 2005 07:22:00 GMT

'perfect', not 'passive'!
The auxiliary for the passive is "to be"; for the perfect it's "to have".

Re: To have

Vorpar — Sat, 03 Dec 2005 15:38:31 GMT

Using "have" that way tends to make sentences passive. I would use the following:

The first man to climb Mount Everest is Sir Edmund Hillary.

To have

Anonymous — Sat, 03 Dec 2005 14:58:41 GMT

Could you please tell me whether the following sentence is fine?
Would you use the words 'to have' ?

THE first man to have climbed the Everest is Sir Edmund Hillary.