[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 18 KB, 200x200, yuki.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13340832 No.13340832 [Reply] [Original]

>that that

>> No.13340851

>having had

>> No.13340854

Does "that that" "had had" etc confuse ESLs or something?

>> No.13340861
File: 815 KB, 4000x3683, please don't.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13340861

>have to have

>> No.13340911

>>13340854
I think it makes sense and it's feels natural to say when you're in the flow, but i don't think it's ever required, right? Any instance that I can think of can be cut down to one "that"

>> No.13340950

Im having a poem published in a major'ish magazine with "that that" in a monologue section.

HAHA!

>> No.13340984
File: 47 KB, 405x720, 1503440899125.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13340984

>that would have had to have had

>> No.13341020

>>13340911
>he had had a bad day so he decided to have a drink
vs
>he had a bad day so he decided to have a drink
I think there's a difference

>> No.13342104

>>13341020
This. It's not the same.
>He had had a bad day
This is pluperfect tense, meaning that it is a past event that occurred before another past event.
>so he decided to have a drink
This is perfect tense, indicating a past event.
So the first sentence clarifies that his having a bad day occurred temporally prior to his deciding to have a drink. The second sentence does not do this and thus "he had a bad day" could be construed as coextensive with "decided to have a drink."

>> No.13342377
File: 73 KB, 1012x1012, 1559814671780.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342377

>Finnegan's Wake

>> No.13342446

Are there any instances of other languages having this kind of shit? I know French has stuff like "vous vous" and "nous nous" but if you understand how reflexive verbs work in French it's really not that confusing. Whereas with the "had had" shit it's somewhat ambiguous whether that's grammatically correct or not.

>> No.13342477

>>13342446
How is it ambiguous? The first "had" marks the tense as pluperfect and the second "had" is the past form of the verb "have." It's no different in nature from the present-perfect "has had."

>> No.13342484

>>13342446
It's not confusing at all to native speakers it sounds clearly like the opening of a new clause but everytime I read it I'm reminded of a retarded hick attempting to write that can only Express himself in a small vocabulary. Either the English language needs to feature it more or find a better way to make it aesthetic

>> No.13342503

>>13342477
Yeah nevermind I guess it's not that ambiguous

>> No.13342517
File: 84 KB, 1053x671, IMG_1126.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342517

>I'd'n't've

>> No.13342542

>>13342503
I think it's an example of people who do not have a solid understanding of grammar engaging in an overzealous attempt to write correctly and thus becoming doubtful of something that is normal and correct.

>> No.13342581
File: 19 KB, 500x590, tessermind.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342581

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

>> No.13342600
File: 27 KB, 414x508, 1468366248310.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342600

>>13340832
>should ought to

>> No.13342693

>>13341020
This.
To put it in simple terms:
A - the bad day was prior to the drink,
B - the bad day was still ongoing during the drink.

>> No.13342749
File: 235 KB, 745x1500, 2vhgoGN.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342749

Here's some fuckery from the Finnish language. It lists all the possible meaning for the sentence "kuusi palaa."

>> No.13342879
File: 851 KB, 667x936, 1553054808652.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13342879

>Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo