Perfect construction in a complement

Question

According to @StoneyB's Cannonical Post #2 . States cannot serve as the complement in Wh-cleft constructions. As an example there,

What John did was have written three novels. – This is not idiomatic English

But what disturb my mind is, what if the state serve as the complement in this kind of sentence

All John did was have written three novels.

Is this sentence grammatical and idiomatic?

What are you trying to say? What do you want this sentence to mean? — Catija, Dec 08 '16 at 00:25
@Catija Im just asking about the construction and they sentences was copied from the cannonical post. Do you think the second sentence grammatical? — Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini, Dec 08 '16 at 03:11
Neither one is grammatical or idiomatic. At a minimum, you need a "to" in front of "have". — MMacD, Dec 08 '16 at 13:22

score 0 · Answer 1 · answered Dec 08 '16 at 13:27

0

If you want to express state, then you'd need something like "John's entire (creative output / life's work) was 3 novels". If you explicitly use a verb, you're no longer expressing state: "The only thing John ever did was write 3 novels".

answered Dec 08 '16 at 13:27

MMacD

2,293
10
10

Hrmm.. stuck at that "creative output".. I still dont get it. – Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini Dec 08 '16 at 13:39

score 0 · Accepted Answer · answered Dec 08 '16 at 13:54

0

You can't do that. You have to do this:

What John had done was write three novels

I think what's happening is that only infinitives (and in this case to is not specified) are valid after to be.

answered Dec 08 '16 at 13:54

LawrenceC

36,836
27
81

What about the second sentence, should it be "All John had done was write three novels"? – Mohd Zulkanien Sarbini Dec 08 '16 at 14:02
That is correct. – LawrenceC Dec 08 '16 at 14:07

Perfect construction in a complement

2 Answers2