Timeline for Asking for grammatical explanations for why "The book has two pages missing." is right
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 15, 2017 at 14:44 | comment | added | Lambie | @SovereignSun I am not going to argue this. For those of us who have taught English, it's as I have explained. But the main point is that it is also used with get. That makes two different verbs using it and traditionally these patterns with have and get are not called reduced clauses. | |
| Dec 15, 2017 at 11:44 | comment | added | SovereignSun | I still find this a bit odd here since "missing" is somewhat an action verb. It sounds as if "the two pages of the book were missing (something)" and not "the two pages were the ones that weren't in the book". Maybe it's slightly ambiguous whereas the "reduced clause" definitely tells us that "the two pages weren't in the book". | |
| Dec 15, 2017 at 3:22 | comment | added | SovereignSun | Yeh, I agree to this too. Quite forgot about this piece of grammar. | |
| Dec 15, 2017 at 3:21 | history | edited | SovereignSun | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Dec 14, 2017 at 14:31 | history | edited | Lambie | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Dec 14, 2017 at 14:25 | history | answered | Lambie | CC BY-SA 3.0 |