 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009Why the use of "had had"
"The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." Why the use of "had had" and not just "had"? Thanks! > "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin > scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." > > Why the use of "had had" and not just "had"? > > Thanks! The narrator, located at T, is discussing Harry in the past (T-X), who acquired a scar even earlier [T - (X + Y)]. The form "had had" is the "pluperfect" of "have", and here relates a point in the prior or deep past [T - (X + Y)] to another in the more recent past [T - X] (the scar might have been surgically removed between T-X and T). The present perfect ("has had") would relate T - (X + Y) all the way to the present (T). On the other hand, "had" here wouldn't make a lot of sense. T - (X + Y) T- X T DEEP PAST PAST PRESENT Scar forms ----------------- Harry considers scar --------------- narrator describes Harry Of course, "deep past" needn't be all that deep: "Yesterday he had held the title deeds for a moment before Sir Roderick snatched them from him." Peter Groves Thanks for your responses so far. I'm still a little fuzzy on this matter. One thing I don't understand is if "had had" is correct in the second sentence, shouldn't the first sentence also use "had"? "The only thing Harry HAD liked about his own appearance was a very thin scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." > Thanks for your responses so far. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "The only thing Harry HAD liked about his own appearance was a very > thin scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." No. Look at it this way -- the first occurrence is "had liked". The second can be paraphrased as "had possessed".  SignatureSkitt (AmE) > "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin > scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." > Why the use of "had had" and not just "had"? This illustrates two different senses of "had." One means "possess." The other is an auxillary verb marking tense. If you know the difference between: He saw it yesterday. He had seen it yersterday. Then you know the difference between: He had it. He had had it. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com 116 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term. Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't. >> "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin >> scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > He had had it. Which leads us to that old standard: James, where John had had "had", had had "had had"; "had had" had had a more positive response. SignatureDavid (...) > Then you know the difference between: > He had it. and > He had had it. (...) In the first case, since you are talking about the past, since he had it, then no way is to know that he still does. The second case is equivalent to "He did have it". The meaning is identical, and it sounds better, if you mean to say that he no longer does have it. In most cases, it is not necessary to write "had had", and it's a prolific awkwardness. "Did have" is preferable. On May 17, 3:08 am, Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> wrote: (...) > Then you know the difference between: > He had it. and > He had had it. (...) In the first case, since you are talking about the past, since he had it, then no way is to know that he still does. The second case is equivalent to "He did have it". The meaning is identical, and it sounds better, if you mean to say that he no longer does have it. In most cases, it is not necessary to write "had had", and it's a prolific awkwardness. "Did have" is preferable. ***The original passage was "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." This is good English. If it is being claimed that it is "preferable" to say "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin scar...He did have it as long as he could remember..." then I would have to say: not outside Arkansas. Peter Groves > (...) >> Then you know the difference between: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > most cases, it is not necessary to write "had had", and it's a > prolific awkwardness. "Did have" is preferable. "Did have" does not mean the same as "had had". SignatureRob Bannister > "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin > scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." > > Why the use of "had had" and not just "had"? > > Thanks! Because "had had" distinguishes between having it and having had it for a long time. > "The only thing Harry liked about his own appearance was a very thin > scar...He had had it as long as he could remember..." > Why the use of "had had" and not just "had"? Sequence of tenses. Because the first verb sets the scene in the past ("The only thing Harry *liked* ..."), all the other verbs are moved one step back too. In the present, the text would read "The only thing Harry likes about his own appearance is a very thin > scar...He has had it as long as he can remember...". |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.