0
Peaceblinkfriend Posted 8 years ago
Grammar

"It had to last longer for you to win it." - makes sense or not?

Hi all

The response in the subject line sounds off to me. I would appreciate if you could tell me whether it is grammatical or if it doesn't, what would be a better alternative. This is the context: Tom and John entered into a bet on whether Tom's new job would last for five months. Tom did not make the mark. Would it make grammatical sense for John to say, "It had to last longer for you to win it"? How about "It had to have lasted longer for you to win it"?

Thank you.

Cheers.
PBF

  

Top answer

" The point is whether or not Tom lasted five months in the job. The statement should reflect that. You (Tom) had to last longer to win.

— Englishmaven

  • " The point is whether or not Tom lasted five months in the job.
  • The statement should reflect that.
  • You (Tom) had to last longer to win.
  • The problem is not related to the tense.
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.

1 Answers
0

Part of the problem is the use of "it." The point is whether or not Tom lasted five months in the job. The statement should reflect that.

You (Tom) had to last longer to win.

The problem is not related to the tense.

0

Related Questions