+0
OK - consider this sentence:
If I'd have had the money I would have bought it.

Here in the UK, that would be a perfectly reasonable sentence, and so far as I know, grammatically correct. "I'd" is short for "I had", so "I'd have had" expands to "I had have had". I've been hearing, using, and reading, this construction for decades, and no-one's questioned it until now.

Now an American tells me that "had have had" is wrong. If I had to guess, I'd guess that they were looking for "If I'd had" instead of "If I'd have had".

Google certainly confirms that I'm not alone in my use of "had have had". The question is, can this usage be backed up in any formal reference? Or is my American friend right, and I've been getting it wrong for nearly half a century?
1 2 3 4 5 6
Comments  (Page 3) 
On further reflection, I believe that I have heard some Americans use the structure had've (had have), and I've seen it spelled had of.

In any case, the origin of the structure has me curious.

If we include the modals will and would, the eight standard (active voice, non-progressive) tenses (of "to do", as an illustration) of English are:

he does
he did
he will do
he would do
he has done
he had done
he will have done
he would have done

In the expression if he'd have done, the 'd cannot mean anything but would unless we exit the paradigm and invent new tenses. Even if if he would have done is ungrammatical because "would is never used in an if-clause", it is the only possibility that exists among the standard tenses shown. To argue that 'd means hadis merely to prefer to say that some other ungrammatical process has occurred -- namely the creation of a non-existent tense. It seems very strange to object to explanation on the grounds that it creates an ungrammatical structure, only to put forward another explanation which creates another ungrammatical structure! Emotion: smile

I cannot help but think that this had've is the compounding of one error upon another. The first error is to place the legitimate tense would have done in both clauses, creating the ungrammatical:

If he would have seen her, he would have told us.

The second error is to realize that the if-clause should have a had in it,

(as in the correct If he had seen her, he would have told us.)

and to "correct the error of omitting had" by putting it back in, substituting have for would:

If he had have seen her, he would have told us.


That the substitution creates a nonsense tense doesn't seem to bother its creators! Emotion: smile

[I can see how had have seen could be called a plupluperfect, but not would have seen, which is a normal tense created with the modal would.]

CJ
CalifJimIn the expression if he'd have done, the 'd cannot mean anything but would unless we exit the paradigm and invent new tenses.
It is curious. You'd expect two additional tenses – a present pluperfect and a past pluperfect:

he has had done
he had had done

– which might both be useful. But instead, "he had have done" implies:

he have have done

– which we never hear, and could scarcely use.

MrP
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
That's two plu's, by the way. plupluperfect!

And, in my humble opinion, they would be:

he has have done
he had have done

-- if they existed, that is, and the second one does (sort of), in the opinion of some.

In any case, I thought that this was to be kept hush-hush, and now you've gone and let the cat out of the bag and everybody will be wanting to use these tenses.Emotion: wink

CJ
English Girl
CalifJimOMG, OMG. Emotion: surprise LOL. Reading all thosehad've had's got me to laughing. (Maybe that's not the reaction you expected?) To my American ear, they are actually funny sounding. My apologies, but they all sound as if spoken by some hillbilly hicks out in the boonies! (At least to me.) That is really amazing how different British and American usage are on this one! Emotion: smile
Emotion: indifferentso true... but have you ever noticed that the English language is simply incredible!!! Some things may sound funny and thus, people do not use them often. But, it is grammatically correct! take for example, commonly made mistakes (singlish in Singapore) - people are oblivious to these mistakes as they are encountered in daily life. They do not seem as funny as it would sound like from a English expert's point of view. [A]The expert would be able to point out from the beginning that the sentence used is incorrect, but we would have to take a long time to find out (just like trying to get rid of hard habits!)... maybe, just maybe the mistakes would not be pointed out at all! Emotion: big smile

Welcome to EnglishForward, English Girl. I agree to your point about using English. If not used properly, the language might give weird, unexpected meanings.Emotion: smile
I try to understand what you guys are dicussing about.

What do you think of:

"If I had have known that he had left, I would not had have arrived." ??
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
"If I had have known that he had left, I would not had have arrived." ??

I'd put it as

"If I'd have known that he had left, I would not have come."
CalifJimThat's two plu's, by the way. plupluperfect!

And, in my humble opinion, they would be:

he has have done
he had have done

So would you think of them like this, CJ:

he has | have done

he had | have done

– i.e. auxiliary + "perfect infinitive", as in "he will/would | have done"?

And with this kind of meaning:

1. ?I hope that A hasn't eaten all the apple pie that B has have baked.

2. ?I hoped that A hadn't eaten all the apple pie that B had have baked.

(Though I realize that "had have" is used mostly in if-statements; which in itself seems curious.)

MrP


What do you think of:

"If I had have known that he had left, I would not had have arrived." ??

What do I think of it? I think it's a monstrosity. Emotion: smile
No matter how many people elsewhere in the world claim there is a tense "had have" + PP, there isn't one!
Every use of that combination is wrong, wrong, wrong! Well, substandard, let's say.

The only correct form of that sentence is

If I had known that he had left, I would not have arrived.

That said, if you want to know the common substandard pattern, there are those who will say

[If I had've / If I'd've] known that he had left, I wouldn't have arrived.

As a learner of English, you should be able to recognize it, but I don't recommend that you ever use it.

By the way, a lot of the posts in this thread are meant to be humorous, not serious. Emotion: wink

CJ

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thank you CJ! Your post is helpful as always.

I too think I'd better not use it. But I want to know it.

Best wishes, Jake
Show more