“Seemed to had” is it correct? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar...
Is high blood pressure ever a symptom attributable solely to dehydration?
How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?
Bonus calculation: Am I making a mountain out of a molehill?
How to motivate offshore teams and trust them to deliver?
Is it possible to boil a liquid by just mixing many immiscible liquids together?
Did Kevin spill real chili?
IndentationError when pasting code in Python 3 interpreter mode
Why is "Consequences inflicted." not a sentence?
The logistics of corpse disposal
How can players work together to take actions that are otherwise impossible?
What does '1 unit of lemon juice' mean in a grandma's drink recipe?
Single word antonym of "flightless"
List *all* the tuples!
What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?
Can Pao de Queijo, and similar foods, be kosher for Passover?
Is there a Spanish version of "dot your i's and cross your t's" that includes the letter 'ñ'?
Stars Make Stars
What would be the ideal power source for a cybernetic eye?
Why are there no cargo aircraft with "flying wing" design?
How does cp -a work
Why did the IBM 650 use bi-quinary?
What's the purpose of writing one's academic bio in 3rd person?
How to find all the available tools in mac terminal?
Can inflation occur in a positive-sum game currency system such as the Stack Exchange reputation system?
“Seemed to had” is it correct?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Are there tools or techniques to stop translating literally?Is this usage of the verb “had outfitted” correct?“Seemed connected” vs “Seemed to be connected.”Is “I have had to take a leave” correct?Is “I switched off television because I had exam the very next day.” correct?It seemed it's gonna take foreverUse of would had beenA teacher said to use “I don't need that” instead of “I won't be needing that” because there is no “continuous in modal verbs”Is “I had better ring him” grammatically correct?Had had (Is it a past perfect or past simple)
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
Here's a sentence I made up:
"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"
Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.
Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:
"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"
Would it still be grammatical?
grammar grammaticality
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
add a comment |
Here's a sentence I made up:
"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"
Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.
Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:
"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"
Would it still be grammatical?
grammar grammaticality
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Here's a sentence I made up:
"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"
Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.
Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:
"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"
Would it still be grammatical?
grammar grammaticality
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
Here's a sentence I made up:
"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"
Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.
Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:
"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"
Would it still be grammatical?
grammar grammaticality
grammar grammaticality
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
asked 1 hour ago
FrostC0FrostC0
354210
354210
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."
This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:
seem / appear to + infinitive
After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).
...
So what you should say is either of:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.
The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
add a comment |
No,
He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.
is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.
Here's what you should use:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
add a comment |
to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:
He seems to understand. [bare, present]
He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]
The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205625%2fseemed-to-had-is-it-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."
This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:
seem / appear to + infinitive
After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).
...
So what you should say is either of:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.
The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
add a comment |
No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."
This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:
seem / appear to + infinitive
After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).
...
So what you should say is either of:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.
The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
add a comment |
No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."
This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:
seem / appear to + infinitive
After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).
...
So what you should say is either of:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.
The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."
This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:
seem / appear to + infinitive
After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).
...
So what you should say is either of:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.
He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.
The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
edited 1 hour ago
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
answered 1 hour ago
Lorel C.Lorel C.
4,7121510
4,7121510
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
add a comment |
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.
– phoog
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
Thank you for the help!
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
@phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.
– Colin Fine
54 mins ago
add a comment |
No,
He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.
is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.
Here's what you should use:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
add a comment |
No,
He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.
is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.
Here's what you should use:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
add a comment |
No,
He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.
is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.
Here's what you should use:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
No,
He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.
is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.
Here's what you should use:
He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
answered 1 hour ago
RobustoRobusto
12.5k23044
12.5k23044
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
1
1
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.
– FrostC0
1 hour ago
add a comment |
to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:
He seems to understand. [bare, present]
He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]
The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
add a comment |
to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:
He seems to understand. [bare, present]
He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]
The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
add a comment |
to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:
He seems to understand. [bare, present]
He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]
The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:
He seems to understand. [bare, present]
He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]
The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
answered 1 hour ago
LambieLambie
17.6k1540
17.6k1540
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205625%2fseemed-to-had-is-it-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.
– Lambie
1 hour ago