0
Anonymous Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
All I have to do is try hard, is "all" the Object of "have" or of "do"?
I'd be happy if someone would answer my question. Thanks in advance.
Concerning the sentence: I've done all I had to do, is "all" the Object of "had" or of "do"?
Concerning the sentence: All I have to do is try hard, is "all" the Object of "have" or of "do"?
Concerning the sentence: I've done all I had to do, is "all" the Object of "had" or of "do"?
Concerning the sentence: All I have to do is try hard, is "all" the Object of "have" or of "do"?
Top answer
1-- 'All' is the object of 'have done' 2-- 'All' is not an object-- it is the subject of 'is'.
- 1-- 'All' is the object of 'have done' 2-- 'All' is not an object-- it is the subject of 'is'.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
1-- 'All' is the object of 'have done'
2-- 'All' is not an object-- it is the subject of 'is'.
2-- 'All' is not an object-- it is the subject of 'is'.
00
--Hi, Cax. Sorry I failed to make my question clear.
What I mean is whether in a relative clause in "I've done all that I had to do", "all" is the Object of "had" or of "do".
Similarly, what I mean is whether in a relative clause in "All that I have to do is try hard",
"all" is the Object of "have" or of "do".
Would you think this matter over agai
What I mean is whether in a relative clause in "I've done all that I had to do", "all" is the Object of "had" or of "do".
Similarly, what I mean is whether in a relative clause in "All that I have to do is try hard",
"all" is the Object of "have" or of "do".
Would you think this matter over agai
00
In the relative clause it's actually the relative pronoun that that you're interested in, right?
all that I [have / had] to do: that is the direct object of do, in the most straight forward reading. (that is assumed if omitted, of course.) But there is ambiguity, and that could also be the direct object of have (or had).
all that I [have / had] to do: that is the direct object of do, in the most straight forward reading. (that is assumed if omitted, of course.) But there is ambiguity, and that could also be the direct object of have (or had).
0
Related Questions