Grammar Nazis come here! =P

[Passions]

"John has had a meeting."

Two verbs put together, has and had, can it be done?

I say no. my co-worker says yes.

😕

 

[Toastedlightly]

Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

 

[KillyKillall]

Are you trying to say that he just had a meeting?

John had a meeting?

Or are you trying to say that he has been in a meeting? (helping verb?)

John has been in a meeting?

 

[Banana]

Co-worker is correct. Think of it this way. It's not wrong to say
"Has John had a meeting?"

 

[Wag]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

 

[moshquerade]

yeh, it sounds clumsy, but it is grammatically correct.

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: Banana
Co-worker is correct. Think of it this way. It's not wrong to say
"Has John had a meeting?"

I know that example it is correct, but how is it possible using a present tense and past tense verb stuck side by side together like that??? has had?

 

[booger711]

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

hahaha

 

[Banana]

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

"Nazi's." is the correct punctuation, not "Nazi's".
(The period is inside the quotation, not outside.)

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Banana

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

"Nazi's." is the correct punctuation, not "Nazi's".
(The period is inside the quotation, not outside.)

i think the period goes outside the quotation. it is not a part of the quotation, but an ending to the sentence.

 

[Nithin]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

actually both are valid british/american

color/colour etc.

 

[Banana]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Banana

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

"Nazi's." is the correct punctuation, not "Nazi's".
(The period is inside the quotation, not outside.)

i think the period goes outside the quotation. it is not a part of the quotation, but an ending to the sentence.

Damn you! You made me google it! Here's Proof 😛

(What Nithin said)

 

[kermalou]

John has just had a meeting.

i think you have to put somehting in the middle of tehm.

🙂 for spelling mistakes,

 

[Whisper]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Banana

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
Sounds like conversational past tense to me.

And it's Grammar, not Grammer

Nazis, not "Nazi's".

"Nazi's." is the correct punctuation, not "Nazi's".
(The period is inside the quotation, not outside.)

i think the period goes outside the quotation. it is not a part of the quotation, but an ending to the sentence.

Commas and periods go inside the quotation marks, whether they are a part of the actual quotation or not. There are markings that do go outside of the quotation marks, although I can't remember any off-hand...maybe exclamation points and semi-colons, or something like that.

And yes, it's correct to say John has had a meeting. There's a technical term for the purpose that the word "had" is serving in that sentence (I believe it's "auxiliary verb"), but I can't remember it at the moment. Basically, because of the usage of "has," it requires an auxiliary (or was it modal...?) verb afterwards.

There's actually a nice little grammatical formula for forming sentences with multiple verbs. I'll try and dig out my linguistics notes at some point if I can work up the motivation.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

It is grammatically correct.

 

[xcript]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i think the period goes outside the quotation. it is not a part of the quotation, but an ending to the sentence.

That would be the British way of doing it (which makes much more sense).

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: xcript

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i think the period goes outside the quotation. it is not a part of the quotation, but an ending to the sentence.

That would be the British way of doing it (which makes much more sense).

Yeah, but we're not in England 😉

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
yeh, it sounds clumsy, but it is grammatically correct.

It's not clumsy, it's the present perfect tense = present tense of to have + past participle