0
Rotter Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
Had had or had
The wicket brought in Matthew Hoggard, who defended resolutely up to tea. But only 52 runs had been added since lunch, and it was heavy going again after the interval.
Finally, Collingwood was trapped lbw as Chaminda Vaas got the new ball to swing.
Collingwood and Liam Plunkett accumulated slowly in a partnership which added 33 in 20 overs.
Then, having been dropped at short leg, Plunkett was finally bowled by Jayasuriya as he loitered on the back foot when he should have been forward.
The wicket brought in Matthew Hoggard, who defended resolutely up to tea. But only 52 runs had been added since lunch, and it was heavy going again after the interval.
Finally, Collingwood was trapped lbw as Chaminda Vaas got the new ball to swing.
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had had so little to cheer.
But just as they had their eyes on a possible lead, Hoggard and Lewis fell in consecutive overs and that was that - England's lowest first-innings score for 13 Tests.
Late in the day, Sri Lanka's batsmen had an hour's batting to do, and they coped well after losing Michael Vandort in the first over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My sole question is on the following sentence.
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had had so little to cheer.
What is wrong with the following alternative sentence?
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had so little to cheer.
Finally, Collingwood was trapped lbw as Chaminda Vaas got the new ball to swing.
Collingwood and Liam Plunkett accumulated slowly in a partnership which added 33 in 20 overs.
Then, having been dropped at short leg, Plunkett was finally bowled by Jayasuriya as he loitered on the back foot when he should have been forward.
The wicket brought in Matthew Hoggard, who defended resolutely up to tea. But only 52 runs had been added since lunch, and it was heavy going again after the interval.
Finally, Collingwood was trapped lbw as Chaminda Vaas got the new ball to swing.
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had had so little to cheer.
But just as they had their eyes on a possible lead, Hoggard and Lewis fell in consecutive overs and that was that - England's lowest first-innings score for 13 Tests.
Late in the day, Sri Lanka's batsmen had an hour's batting to do, and they coped well after losing Michael Vandort in the first over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My sole question is on the following sentence.
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had had so little to cheer.
What is wrong with the following alternative sentence?
Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had so little to cheer.
Top answer
I think that had is quite acceptable. However, I prefer had had in this case. From the context, I consider that the main point is not that at that one point in time that had so little to cheer, but that during the duration of the entire morning they had had so little to cheer.
- I think that had is quite acceptable.
- However, I prefer had had in this case.
- From the context, I consider that the main point is not that at that one point in time that had so little to cheer, but that during the duration of the entire morning they had had so little to cheer.
- BTW, I do not like who in this case, but prefer that.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
I think that had is quite acceptable. However, I prefer had had in this case. From the context, I consider that the main point is not that at that one point in time that had so little to cheer, but that during the duration of the entire morning they had had so little to cheer.
BTW, I do not like who in this case, but prefer that.
BTW, I do not like who in this case, but prefer that.
00
>What is wrong with the following alternative sentence?
>Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first
since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had so little to cheer.
You are not putting the events in the required temporal order, which is:
Until that time/Previously to that time
>Jon Lewis came in and whacked four boundaries - they were the first
since before lunch and were raucously celebrated by a crowd who had so little to cheer.
You are not putting the events in the required temporal order, which is:
Until that time/Previously to that time
0
Related Questions