As in "The rhinos had to have been drugged otherwise they would have caused more damage."
He has been...perfect tense
He had been...plusperfect tense
I can't get my head around this one, your English language is complex.
2007-06-22 00:04:02 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Languages
youngb..'He has been' would be past perfect
2007-06-22 00:10:55 · update #1
It's OBVIOUSLY in the past tense...but which past tense??
He has run = (past) perfect
He was running = (past) imperfect
He had run = (past) plusperfect.
2007-06-22 00:21:17 · update #2
Ah, thank you all from Luscious onwards..I see where I'm going wrong now.
2007-06-22 00:23:50 · update #3
Ond ... ynd nghymraeg ... rhaid fod hi wedi ... yr un math o peth tin meddwl??
2007-06-22 02:02:11 · answer #1 · answered by Joanne 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a compound construction using more than one meaning of the verb "to have".
The word "had" is the simple past tense (preterite). The word here is used to indicate compulsion or inevitability. You could substitute the word "needed".
"to have been drugged" is the passive perfect infinitive of the verb to drug. It is the object of the verb "had". It indicates that someone unquoted did the drugging, it happened in the past and it was more than instantaneous.
The construction is colloquial.
2007-06-22 07:19:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's past deduction.
Does changing it to "The rhinos must have been drugged...." make it any clearer? It means exactly the same. "Have to" means the same as "must", here used to express certainty, and we're using the present perfect (have been) to talk about an action in the non-specific past.
2007-06-22 07:20:31 · answer #3 · answered by fruitybat101 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In this sentence I would say that "had to" is not a tense, it shows obligation in the past...
So, if it is like that, "have been" shows the tense of the sentence.
I may be wrong though...
I'm not sure..
=)
Oh, and I think that "he has been" is present perfect and "he had been" is past perfect.
2007-06-22 07:18:21 · answer #4 · answered by LuSciOuS♥ 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Past tense
2007-06-22 07:10:56 · answer #5 · answered by Scatty 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Past perfect and pluperfect are the same thing.
In your sentence, "had to" is the simple past, an implied modal of necessity.
"have been drugged" is present perfect passive.
"would have caused" is third conditional/past conditional.
2007-06-22 07:20:40 · answer #6 · answered by Goddess of Grammar 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"had to have been drugged" is actually two verbs. The main verb (had to) is the imperfect of "to have to" and it is followed by a dependent verbal phrase which is the perfect inifinitve of "to be" ("to have been") or, you could say, by the perfect infinitive of the passive verb "to be drugged"
2007-06-22 07:45:01 · answer #7 · answered by GrahamH 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
past perfect
2007-06-22 07:05:52 · answer #8 · answered by younggb77 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Aaaaarggghhh!! A star for asking this question!
2007-06-22 08:01:03 · answer #9 · answered by mira_iam 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋