|
|
 #2 (permalink) Mon Feb 13, 2012 21:02 pm Was v/s Had |
|
|
The man sustained from injuries.
In my humble opinion, this could be a correct form in a context. |
|
 E2e4
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Posts: 1229
|
|
| #3 (permalink) Mon Feb 13, 2012 21:13 pm Re: Was v/s Had |
|
|
| Swayam wrote: |
But can someone explain to me the technical reason for the same.
Thanks :) [/b] |
(1) I believe that the "technical reason" is that English speakers have decided that the so-called past perfect = had + past participle.
(a) The man HAD SUSTAINED serious injuries before the ambulance ARRIVED.
(2) Now consider this sentence: The man SUSTAINED injuries yesterday.
(a) You could change that to the passive: Injuries WERE SUSTAINED by the man yesterday. |
|
James M
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 15 May 2011
Posts: 573
|
 |
| #4 (permalink) Mon Feb 13, 2012 21:52 pm Was v/s Had |
|
|
| E2e4 wrote: |
| The man sustained from injuries. |
This is not correct. In the simple past you would say "The man sustained injuries". In the past perfect this becomes "The man had sustained injuries", as James has said.
"The man was sustained" means that something sustained the man. You could say "The man was sustained by a diet of bread and cheese", for example. However, "The man was sustained injuries" makes no sense.
Interestingly, "A had sustained B" potentially has two interpretations. As well as the past perfect interpretation with "sustained" as the main verb, "sustained" could be interpreted as an adjective in certain cases. This does not work well with the original sentence, but an example (randomly picked from Google search results) might be "Eleven per cent had sustained remission." |
|
Dozy
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Posts: 3315
Location: UK
|
|
|
| grammar help | Reported speech |
