0
Nakool Posted 12 years ago
Grammar

Spotting errors

I have had to work at the fountain for almost ten hours before it could start functioning well.

My book says that there is no such error in the above sentence.

As per my understanding, shouldn't it be 'had had' in place of 'have had'?

In 'had had', one 'had to' denotes' compulsion and the other 'had' denotes past perfect tense since the whole sentence is in the past.
  

Top answer

My book says that there is no such error in the above sentence. Nakool As per my understanding, shouldn't it be 'had had' in place of 'have had'? Yes, your understanding is correct.

— Grammarfreak

  • My book says that there is no such error in the above sentence.
  • Nakool As per my understanding, shouldn't it be 'had had' in place of 'have had'?
  • Yes, your understanding is correct.
  • By the book, past perfect is correct because you had a 'before-clause' which suggested one event happened before another.
  • However, my experience is, people usually don't bother with past perfect in real life conversation if the context is clear enough.
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.

9 Answers
0
NakoolI have had to work at the fountain for almost ten hours before it could start functioning well.My book says that there is no such error in the above sentence.
NakoolAs per my understanding, shouldn't it be 'had had' in place of 'have had'?
Yes, your understanding is correct. By the book, past perfect is correct becaus
0
0
'I have had to work' is not correct in that sentence. 'I had to work' is natural and correct.

'...Before it could start functioning ...' is not very natural. Better would be '... before it started functioning ...' or '... before I could get it to start functioning ...'
0
0
'had to' is a compulsion and the other 'had' should be used because 'for almost ten hours' is written. As per my understanding 'for' and 'since' are preceded by present or past perfect tense. So I think 'had had' should be used in place of 'have had'.
0
0
Nakool'had to' is a compulsion and the other 'had' should be used because 'for almost ten hours' is written. As per my understanding 'for' and 'since' are preceded by present or past perfect tense. So I think 'had had' should be used in place of 'have had'.
As GF suggested, 'before' makes the sequence of events clear. The past perfect is not essential.
0
0
Nakool,
As explained to you, 'have had ' is the incorrect tense because it involved more than one past events. However, your sentence had the conjunction 'before' which made the sentence self-explanatory. So thee is no need for past perfect. If you want to insist on using "had had ..." we won't stop you. But that's the way the language is used.
0
0
grammarfreakAs explained to you, 'have had ' is the incorrect tense because it involved more than one past events.
It's nothing to do with the number of events. The present perfect is not correct; that is because the present perfect is used for situations/a situation in a period of time leading up to the moment of speaking/writing. Nakool's
0
0
As a side note, I'd say "work on the fountain" not "at" it.
0
0
fivejedjon The present perfect is not correct
I already acknowledged present perfect was incorrect. I also said past perfect was text-book correct but not needed in the original sentence before of the use of 'before'.
fivejedjon present perfect is used for situations/a situation in a period of time leading up to the moment of speaking/w
0
0
grammarfreak. I don't see your point
So I see.
0

Related Questions