# Before?

•  0
We have to raise the necessary capital = correct sentence

We have an adverb phrase we want to integrate into the above sentence:

before the end of the month = when

Before means at or during a time earlier than (the the end of this month)

So, our problem now has been narrowed down to whether we can insert the phrase in the sentence, in the above place.

We have to raise the necessary capital (before the end of the month) = at a time before the end of the month = correct sentence

We have (before the end of the month) to raise the necessary capital = by the same token, I think it is correct.

Question: what is wrong with my reasoning?
1 2 3
In the second sentence you lose the urgency. It's correct, but instead of saying "We have to do X before Y," you're saying "We have before Y to do X." Int he second sentence, you're just doing X, whereas in the first, you HAVE to do it.

It's a slight difference. I think it's the only difference.
AnonymousIn the second sentence you lose the urgency. It's correct, but instead of saying "We have to do X before Y," you're saying "We have before Y to do X." Int he second sentence, you're just doing X, whereas in the first, you HAVE to do it.

It's a slight difference. I think it's the only difference.
thanks

According to CJ I am wrong. I do not know why?
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Hi,

We have to raise the necessary capital (before the end of the month) = at a time before the end of the month = correct sentence Yes

We have (before the end of the month) to raise the necessary capital = by the same token, I think it is correct. No.

Permit me to take a try at explaining, but let's consider a simpler example. Assume it's 2pm.

Tom has to call Mary before 6pm. Correct. 'Before 6pm' specifes the deadline. It's the end of a period of time.

Tom has before 6pm to call Mary. Incorrect. The syntax calls for 'Tom has 4 hours to call Mary'.

[ You could also say '(from now) until 6pm', which is just another way of specifying a period of time ].

To put it another way, you can do something (eg call Mary) before 6pm, but you can't 'have 6pm'.

To put it yet another way:

In 'Tom has to call Mary before 6pm', 'has to' expresses necessity.

In 'Tom has 4 hours to call Mary'', 'has' is for possession. You can possess 4 hours, but you can't possess 'before 6pm'.

Best wishes, Clive
We have to raise the necessary capital before the end of the month. OK (We have to=We must ... )

We have until/by the end of the month to raise the necessary capital. Another possibility. (But: We have time until ....)
According to CJ I am wrong.

Aarrgghh!!!
I thought you understood this from a previous post!

You were on the right track with your analysis of "split infinitive" earlier - although it wasn't a split infinitive.
By splitting have from to, you lose the obligation meaning of have.
There are some cases where a single-word sentence adverb can intervene in that position (as a sort of stylistic device), but in the general case, separating have from to will destroy the obligation meaning of have, leaving only the possession meaning of have.

We have to leave immediately.> We are obliged to leave immediately. (have to not separated)

We have therefore to leave immediately.> Therefore, we are obliged to leave immediately. (have to separated by a sentence adverb for a stylistic effect)

We have several reasons to leave immediately.> We possess several reasons. Each of these reasons guides our judgment toward the action of leaving immediately. (have to separated, but not by a single sentence adverb - obligation aspect of meaning lost - but there's still a logical interpretation with have = possess.)

*We have immediately to leave.> *We possess immediately. (???) (have to = obligation lost by separation; no logical interpretation with have = possess; result - a meaningless group of words)

*We have before then to leave.> *We possess before then. (???) (same analysis as previous example)

No matter how you interpret the last sentence above, it is not equivalent to We [have to / are obliged to] leave before then. At least, a native speaker would set his brain into a double twist to understand it that way because the separation of have from to has destroyed the obligation aspect of the group have to.

Clear as mud?

CJ
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
I have no other option but to give inyour powerful argument.

(this is not a split infinitive and it doesnot mean 'have to' -- am I right?)

Thank you CJ, and thank you Clive
Clive
Tom has before 6pm to call Mary. Incorrect. The syntax calls for 'Tom has 4 hours to call Mary'.

[ You could also say '(from now) until 6pm', which is just another way of specifying a period of time ].

Hi Clive,

Your reasoning is coherent; however, there is something I still do not get:

If I am not mistaken, the above part of your post means that to say:

'I have until 6pm to call Marry'

is acceptable; but it is unacceptable to me. However,

'I have from now until 6pm to call Mary' sounds fine.

Thanks
InchoateknowledgeI have no other option but to give inyour powerful argument.

(this is not a split infinitive and it doesnot mean 'have to' -- am I right?)

Thank you CJ, and thank you Clive

Correct, There, "have" is possessive.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies