Is this sentence grammatical:
[color=indigo]1) I made more money than my Dad had.
Can’t this mean two things:
[color=blue]a) I made more money than my Dad possessed.
[color=red]b) I made more money than my Dad had made (at a previous time, presumably during his professional life)
‘I made more money than my Dad had had’ would remove the ambiguity and convey the meaning suggested in a). (I don’t think we can take ‘had’ to mean ‘had made’, for it could only mean ‘did have’ here.)
I don’t think it removes an y ambiguity. In fact it confuses matters more.
Than your dad had had when?
I made more money than my Dad had. = I made more money than my Dad possessed.
I made more money than my Dad did. = I made more money than my Dad had made (at a previous time, presumably during his professional life)
No, not at all clear, I’m afraid. A single instance of ‘had’ is actually clearer, though far from ideal.
If you wish to find a more natural sentence which removes ambiguity, than I suggest you extend it:
I made more money in X years than my dad ever had.
I made more money in X years than my dad made in his entire career.
Yes, ‘to be clear or ideal’ OR ‘to be or not to be ideal’ is the question!
I’d say it’s not reasonable to expect others also to look at the question from the same angle as you do. When I counter your arguments you tend to stray from the point and concoct new situations (X years) just to justify your position somehow. I’m sorry; it is irrational. When we cannot see eye to eye with each other on an aspect, we had better avoid further discussion. LUSH.
Equally I’d say it’s not reasonable to expect others also to look at the question from the same angle as you do, particularly where you have to resort to arguing that adding clarification is ‘straying from the point’.
Thanks once again for the lovely compliment. You certainly know how to compliment a girl telling her that she’s lush all the time.