1. The course is to have included music.
Could you explain to me about the the structure " be to have + past participle"?
2. Therefore, humans need to interfere with the process of extinction not only because they instigate it but also because doing so can bring benefits to them.
Is the sentence above grammatically correct?
t Bình 1. Could you explain to me about the the structure " be to have + past participle"? It's the past of the 'is to' idiom.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
Nh?t Bình1. The course is to have included music.Could you explain to me about the the structure " be to have + past participle"?
It's the past of the 'is to' idiom. (There is no 'be to' or 'be to have', so that's technically not the correct name of the idiom.)
These are the forms:
With present infinitive: am to, is to, are to, was to, were
Nh?t Bình2. Therefore, humans need to interfere with the process of extinction not only because they instigate it but also because doing so can bring benefits to them.
Is the sentence above grammatically correct?
Yes.
CJ
Nh?t Bình1. The course is to have included music.
That is not good English.
You can say: "The course was to have included music." but it is very very rare. (See CJ's post)
The construct: to + have + past participle is called "the perfect infinitive."
Here is a good resource.
Nh?t Bình1. The course is to have included music.
Either "The course is to include music.", meaning "It is intended that the course will include music." or "The course was to have included music.", meaning "The course was planned such that it would include music", implying that it does not in fact now include music. "Is to have" garbles the tense.