/lit/ - Literature

>>12826352
>he had had to to to have had it to have to have done it to it to have had it too

>>12826352
Its unavoidable sometimes, okay? Get over it nerd

>>12826386
No it's not. Post one single sentence where it's impossible to word the sentence differently to avoid it.

Bill Clinton used 'is' twice in a row and that guys a genius

In the Dutch language it's fairly common to say "you you", and it isn't considered a mistake. And sometimes we say "that that" aswell.

>>12826560

Not a mistake, but either inelegant or dickish in prose.

>>12826571
I agree. I try to avoid it while writing.

In Portuguese it is common to say ''se se'' (if if), but it's not really considered in good taste, although it's not technically wrong either.

>>12826352
>is is

Some people think that that that good is is bad.

>that that

>>12826352
>will be will be

>>12826645
>>12826543
I hope you guys are just shitposting and you're not such brainlets that you can't see the difference.

>>12826907
the problem is, is that it doesn't sound as good as the problem is that it doesn't sound as good

>>12826352
>había tenido
>>12826856
que eso

>>12826352
Does French not have any of these, anyone know?

>>12826947
>nous nous

>>12826923
Yours isn't just awkward. It's just grammatically incorrect period. Clinton's first 'is' was using it as a noun - meaning he was referring to the actual word itself.

>>12826352
>have to rewrite the entire paragraph just because a sentence ends up with one of these stylistic blemishes
makes my nuts itch

>>12826954
No no. That's just repetition. Oui oui is just showing enthusiasm
Mon dieu

>>12826533
Here.
>She thought of the recurrent waves of pain that for some reason or other she and her husband had had to endure; of the in visible giants hurting her boy in some unimaginable fashion; of the incalculable amount of tenderness contained in the world; of the fate of this tenderness, which is either crushed or wasted, or transformed into madness; of neglected children humming to themselves in unswept corners; of beautiful weeds that cannot hide from the farmer.

Had had is completely fine, one is the main verb and the other the "helping verb", which in English happen to be the same word. Seriously do you fags not know basic grammar?

>>12827030
I would have said, "were forced."

>>12827030
That's not necessary at all. First of all, you can simply omit one of the 'had's and the sentence is very similar, though it does change slightly. Changing one of the 'had's to an adverb or tossing an adverb like 'recently' in between them works too. Removing one of the 'had's and placing a phrase like 'in the recent past' (I don't know the context to give a more accurate replacement) works too.

So in short, it's not absolutely necessary at all. You could argue it's stylistically necessary, but style never has to obey the rules of grammar. In a grammatical sense, 'had had' is absolutely not necessary there.

>>12826989
Dumb namefag

>>12827072
It looks like anon was making a joke. It's a legit answer? 'kay

>>12827051
The problem isn't the grammar it's the style

>>12827114
How often does this occur in writing that so many people are torqued about it? I know that I speak this combination on rare occasion, but I do not recall ever actually having written it.

>>12827094
French people do that all the time. Sometimes really badly. I don't know how they put up with it/justify it.

"Hon hon hon, we will take le French flag and add le niggur"

"I like baguettes hon hon hon"

How is that acceptable? Garbage language.

>>12827131
You have not even gotten to counting numbers in French yet.

>>12826352
>got got

>>12827056
that sounds dorky as fuck. and that's why you're not a writer.

>>12827186
get got

>>12827193
>got had

>>12827186
got got got got blood rush to my head lit hot lock

>>12826375

>>12827128
I notice it at least once per book. That that too

>>12827186
Watch me pop off

>>12826352
>that that

>James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher

>>12826865
Was she a spinozan?

>>12826947
Motorcycles? Definitely not!

>>12826560
alleen wanneer men 'je' gebruikt, als een barbaar

>>12827186
YUH

>>12826352
>that that
:^)