'She made me shoot a rabbit' (here, I don't want to use make causative as in my intended meaning, I was not forced but I was hired to shoot the rabbit and another thing, I wish to show that the action of shooting has been completed. But I wanna say this informally so, I choose to go with get instead of have causative).

  1. 'She got me to shoot a rabbit' ( I think here, 'to shoot' is not giving the sense of Shooting has been done or completed).

  2. 'She got me Shooting the rabbit'(Shooting is in process here,not finished).

  3. 'She got me shooted the rabbit' (It is wrong as 'shooted' is followed by 'the rabbit' and Here, 'shooted' is giving passive sense not active).

  4. 'She got the rabbit killed by me' (I think it is the least wrong one. But It is followed by 'by+agent' and I don't think a causative can followed by it).

with the help of my all four attempts I think you would've got my intended meaning. So, can it be expressed with 'get' causative. And is there any better way to say it?

  • 1
    I'm not too sure, but I suspect Americans might be more likely to prefer She got me to kill it (which sounds a bit more "colloquial" to me) rather than She had me kill it (which is at least slightly "starchy / formal", even for me as a Brit). Jun 21 at 14:51
  • 1
    If that youtube video causes you to think the highlighted word in She got me to shoot a rabbit somehow relates to the fact that whatever she did to make me shoot the rabbit must have happened before the actual shooting took place, all I can say is it's not a useful video for you to watch. I only listened to a few seconds around the bit you were interested in, so I can't really say if the guy is talking sense or not. Jun 21 at 16:09
  • 1
    I will make time to listen to the whole thing. That connection between the infinitive and the future is a new concept to me, but it might be meaningful, i dunno. Jun 21 at 16:20
  • 1
    A BIT LATER... Okay, I've listened to the whole video, and yes - what he's saying seems to make sense. It might even be a useful approach to differentiating 1) She got me to kill rabbits and 2) She got me killing rabbits. Where #1 might imply I only killed rabbits in the past, at her behest, reluctantly, but #2 might imply that she simply introduced me to the possibility of killing rabbits - which I then actually did, and enjoyed so much that I've been happily killing rabbits every day since! :) Jun 21 at 16:41
  • 1
    You might want to have a look at “Get something to work” vs ”Get something working” as asked some years ago on ELU. The main takeaway I get from that page is that even most native speakers wouldn't normally be conscious of any significant difference between the two verb forms there, so you should be careful to avoid thinking there's a very important rule involved here. But the general principle presented by the Youtube guy might help you learn / remember / decide which verbs associate better with the infinitive, and which with the gerund. Jun 21 at 16:57

(3) is wrong because shooted is not a valid verb form. The past tense is shot.

(2) Get someone [verb]ing doesn't work for a single action. You could say 'She got me shooting rabbits' meaning that she encouraged me to take up shooting as an activity.

(1) is the best. It doesn't give any sense that the shooting hasn't happened.

(4) puts more emphasis on the death of the rabbit than on the action of shooting.

  • in get someone/something [verb]ing I saw an example, 'I got the machine working'.....is it not a single action(progressive action) And, in (3) if I correct It to 'she got me shot the rabbit' would it be then right?
    – RADS
    Jun 21 at 10:46
  • 1
    I should have gone on to say that she got me shot the rabbit doesn't work either. Got the machine working is a continuing or progressive action, and got me shooting implies a repeated or habitual action. Jun 21 at 12:01
  • In (1) you said, "it doesn't give any sense that shooting hasn't happened'....does it mean we can't say, for sure,shooting has happened or not?
    – RADS
    Jun 22 at 2:02
  • 1
    You said I think here, 'to shoot' is not giving the sense of Shooting has been done or completed. I said that it does give that sense - that's why I considered it the best way to express your meaning. Jun 22 at 7:44

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.