Hi
Do you think this construction is correct: hadn’t’ve done (i.e. had not have + past participle)?
Have any of you ever heard a native speaker of English use this construction?
If so, share the details! :mrgreen:
British usage? American usage? Common? Uncommon? etc.
.
Hi Amy,
Yes, I have. If my memory doesn’t fail me, I think I heard it in US or in some movie or soap drama. I cannot recall it for a real one but I would suggest:
If you hadn’t’ve said it that way, the boss wouldn’t’ve laid you off.
I feel the repetition of ‘have’ in a negative context is just to get a better rhythm and word-carrying like ‘hadna’ etc. in spoken English.
Haihao
Hello Amy,
I hear this structure very often in BrE; but increasingly less so as the speaker’s form of English approaches the standard form. I rarely (if ever) see it in edited texts, on the other hand, except in dialogue; and even speakers who use it in their speech seem not to use it very much in emails, informal notes, etc. (though when they do, it sometimes takes the form of “of”, as in the example in the Great Gatsby).
You also hear a number of variants, e.g.
— especially in e.g. football commentaries (naturally enough).
More mysteriously, though it’s much more common in the less prestigious forms of BrE, it doesn’t seem to be a conscious shibboleth. Thus although BrE speakers will sometimes make derogatory comments about another speaker’s English (e.g. the use of “ain’t” or double negatives), I’ve never heard “had have” discussed in that context.
Another odd aspect is the grammar. It seems to be an old structure (there’s an example in Malory); and the OED has a note somewhere to the effect that there are many examples of redundant “haves” in 15th and 16th century English. But it doesn’t seem to follow the expected pattern for a “plupluperfect”, which I would take to be:
not
So the “have done” is presumably a perfect infinitive form; which makes me wonder if equivalents of these structures once existed:
— and if the “to” has simply disappeared in all three. (Not that I’ve ever seen any research to support that idea.)
See you later,
MrP
Are you talking about the spoken form again? If, as you claim, a person loses the use of “hadn’t’ve done” when approaching the standard form, what does she replace it with? And aren’t most British people who are able to use the standard form also able to use another dialect? So, maybe many people continue to use “hadn’t’ve done” in certain contexts.
Thanks, MrP! Your analysis was very interesting. You’ve also satisfied my curiosity about whether this construction is known and/or commonly used in the UK too.
On this side of the pond it seems that this “odd” (but not uncommon) construction is found primarily
and also, but less commonly
The pronunciations I’ve heard for hadn’t’ve would be (roughly) hadena, hadenda, or hadden of. A person’s educational background doesn’t seem to play too much of a role in the usage of this expression. However, it also seems that the more formal the conversation gets, the less likely you are to hear this construction.
.
.
.
Hi Haihao
Your IF sentence was exactly the sort of sentence I hear people use.
.
I hear this one, too:
You hear e.g. “If he would have done” too over here; usually informally, instead of “if he had done”; but sometimes in formal texts, with a genuine sense of “willing”.
I’ve sometimes seen the suggestion that #1 is in fact a version of “If only I would have known”; but the inverted form, e.g. “had he have only done X”, suggests that this isn’t the case.
Yes; hence “hear”.
No, you’ve misunderstood. As forms of English approach the standard form. Thus the more distant the form is, from the standard form, the more likely it is that you will hear this construction.
As for “replacing” it:
#2 will always be a satisfactory “replacement” for #1; those who say “If only I’d known!” are not particularly disadvantaged.
MrP