Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: "Skitt" <skitt99@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 10:11:35 -0700
Robert Lieblich wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:Skitt wrote:Skitt wrote:
Add the right word after I should have __________ the doctor
immediately.
"To see" or "see" is just flat wrong.
Boy, did I screw that one up royally.
Add the right word at the blank:
I should have __________ the doctor immediately.
"To see" or "see" is just flat wrong.
Yes, but the sentences feel different to me. (Quite apart from the
way your example reminds me of the beginning of /Catch-22/.) The
"What I should have done was ..." brings sequence of tenses into
play, not unlike reported speech.
"What" is a pronoun, a substantive. It's the simple subject of the
sentence; the full subject is "What I should have done." That's a
substantive phrase. "To see" is an infinitive, which can be, and here
is, used as a noun, another substantive. Hence, the sentence is
grammatically balanced in the form "What I should have done was [to]
see the doctor immediately." It is unbalanced if you replace the
infnitive with "seen," because then the subjective complement of
"what" is "seen". But a subjective complement must be a noun or
pronoun, and in the nominative case if that matters. "Seen" flunks
the first test -- it ain't no noun or pronoun.
If it matters, the version with "see" or even "to see" sounds much
better to my native speaker's ear than the one with "seen." Those of
you who feel otherwise are entitled to do so, but it would help if you
could invoke some sort of grsmmatical analysis in support --
preferably one that makes some sort of sense.
OK, I'll try to make some sense -- not as analytically as you did, but more intuitively. The way I see the sentence I supported is as I show below, putting what I believe to be an elision in brackets:
"What I should have done was [: I should have] seen the doctor immediately."
With the elision, the first "should have" is serving both the
"done" and the "seen".
Googling and substituting the verb "go" for "see" (to get more results), I got:
on the Web
"should have done is go" -- 1130 hits
"should have done is to go" -- 18 hits
"should have done is gone" -- 857 hits
in Google Books
"should have done is go" -- 3 hits
"should have done is to go" -- 0 hits
"should have done is gone" -- 19 hits
It seems, I have quite a bit of company for my beliefs, especially so in books.
Right or wrong, I have now figured out why the infinitive seems unnatural to me. It's all in the way one looks at things.
--
Skitt (AmE)
looking things up, and things are looking up
.
- References:
- What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Huh Maru
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Glenn Knickerbocker
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: matt271829-news
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Skitt
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Oleg Lego
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Skitt
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Skitt
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- From: Robert Lieblich
- What I should have done is(was)....
- Prev by Date: Re: This is the Assembly night
- Next by Date: Re: On the catch for him
- Previous by thread: Re: What I should have done is(was)....
- Next by thread: Lamps ... all over Europe
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading