0
Boyonfire Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
have come vs have came?
I've seen:
1) You should have come to the party.
but not:
2) You should have came to the party.
but when you replace come with something else, it's in past tense.
1) You should have went to the party.
2) You should have shot the target.
Which is correct for the first set and why is that?
1) You should have come to the party.
but not:
2) You should have came to the party.
but when you replace come with something else, it's in past tense.
1) You should have went to the party.
2) You should have shot the target.
Which is correct for the first set and why is that?
Top answer
It's should have + past participle 1) You should have come to the party. - OK 2) You should have came to the party. - not OK 1) You should have went to the party.
- It's should have + past participle 1) You should have come to the party.
- - OK 2) You should have came to the party.
- - not OK 1) You should have went to the party.
- - wrong ("gone" instead of "went") 2) You should have shot the target.
- - OK (but the past simple and the past participle of this verb are the same)
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
25 Answers
0
It's should have + past participle
1) You should have come to the party. - OK
2) You should have came to the party. - not OK
1) You should have went to the party.
1) You should have come to the party. - OK
2) You should have came to the party. - not OK
1) You should have went to the party.
00
LoojkaIt's should have + past participle
1) You should have come to the party. - OK
2) You should have came to the party. - not OK
1) You should have went
00
0
Anonymousits HAVE CAMEThis answer is totally wrong. Read the thread again. "have come" is correct, as stated above in other answers.
CJ
00
It's you should have COME to the party !
The right one is : You should have SHOT the target!
It's you should have GONE to the party!
YOU SHOULD HAVE CAME DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
: )
I 've heard a lot of people say "you should have WENT" and I find it weird since they've learned english all along and are even really good at it! Hahaha.
The right one is : You should have SHOT the target!
It's you should have GONE to the party!
YOU SHOULD HAVE CAME DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
: )
I 've heard a lot of people say "you should have WENT" and I find it weird since they've learned english all along and are even really good at it! Hahaha.
00
how about, to come up/ to came up?
1) i only have to come up
2) i only have to came up
are both correct? i think i need to know more on 'to'
1) i only have to come up
2) i only have to came up
are both correct? i think i need to know more on 'to'
00
to come up.
infinitive - past - past participle
wait - waited - waited
see - saw - seen
throw - threw - thrown
come - came - come
CJ
infinitive - past - past participle
wait - waited - waited
see - saw - seen
throw - threw - thrown
come - came - come
CJ
00
I have come. This is in the present perfect form.
However, the past form of come is came. According to the rule, the present perfect is formed using
the present form of 'to be' + the verb's conjugation that is in the past form
example: I have played football for twenty years now.
Please explain the deviation.
However, the past form of come is came. According to the rule, the present perfect is formed using
the present form of 'to be' + the verb's conjugation that is in the past form
example: I have played football for twenty years now.
Please explain the deviation.
00
Hi,
I have come. This is in the present perfect form.
However, the past form of come is came. According to the rule, the present perfect is formed using
the present form of 'to be' + the verb's conjugation that is in the past form .
No. It's 'to be + the Past Participle' (not the Past Tense).
For
I have come. This is in the present perfect form.
However, the past form of come is came. According to the rule, the present perfect is formed using
the present form of 'to be' + the verb's conjugation that is in the past form .
No. It's 'to be + the Past Participle' (not the Past Tense).
For
0
Related Questions