1: I was stupid to followed her advice
2: I was stupid that I followed her advice
3: I was stupid to have followed her advice
4: I was stupid that I had followed her advice
Do these 4 sentences mean the same?
English Language Learners Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for speakers of other languages learning English. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
With an animate (or rational) subject, stupid takes a "to" infinitive clause:
I was stupid to follow/to have followed her advice
With an impersonal subject ("it"), stupid can take either a "to" infinitive clause, or a "that" clause:
- It was stupid to follow her advice
- It was stupid that I followed her advice.
If you want to specify the subject, you can use for with a "to" infinitive:
- It was stupid for me to follow her advice.
but you can also specify the person who was stupid with "of" in either case:
- It was stupid of me to follow her advice.
- It was stupid of me that I followed her advice.
(My 3 and 4 have nearly the same meaning, but different structures: in 3, for me to follow her advice is the complement clause, with me as its subject; in 4, the complement is to follow her advice without a subject, and of me is an adjunct of "stupid".)
The facts that I have given about what the word takes in the different uses are arbitrary facts that happen to be how the word behaves in current English: there is no rule or logic that will tell you them.
On the question of past infinitive/past perfect: these are used when the speaker wishes to locate something in time relative to some later viewpoint. They are nearly always optional, and are often not used when the temporal relationships are clear without them. In your 3 and 4, the speaker is choosing to focus the time at some point later than their following the advice: it is presumably clear to their hearers when this time was that they are "looking back" from. If they use your 1 and 2, they are not placing a viewpoint at any particular time.