0
Angliholic Posted 19 years ago
Grammar

had her running

Natalie's children had her running all over town tosay.

Natalie's children had her buy them expensive toys.

Why does the first utterance use the present participle while the second bare infinitive? What is the vital factor that decides this kind of diverse usage? Thanks.
  

Top answer

In the first, Natalie's children were the cause of her many errands. In the second, Natalie's children required it of her. )

  • In the first, Natalie's children were the cause of her many errands.
  • In the second, Natalie's children required it of her.
  • )
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

4 Answers
0
In the first, Natalie's children were the cause of her many errands.

In the second, Natalie's children required it of her. (Not very effective parenting if you ask me.)
0
This is one of the instances where everyday speech can sometimes override correct grammar. The first sentence is correct, but you might actually hear someone say, had her run all over town to buy them toys.
The second sentence should correctly be, had her buying them expensive toys, but again, casual speakers might say 'buy'.
"Her" is a (possessive) pronoun; and must be followed by a no
0
Terry, I'm sorry, but I don't agree.

I had my daughter bring me the phone. That's not incorrect grammar. It doesn't have to be "I had my daughter bringing me the phone."

So I can say "I had her bring me the phone." Her is a simple pronoun, not a possessive.
0
Why does the first utterance use the present participle while the second [uses the] bare infinitive?
The present participle make us think of some kind of continuing or repeated action. She ran to the post office. She ran to the grocery store. She ran to the school. She ran to the soccer game. There was no end to it!

The bare infinitive makes us think of

Related Questions