About perfect particle clauses [on hold]












0















How do I form a correct perfect particle clauses sentence?



Do these sentences mean the same thing? Or does changing the verb change the meaning? Can I still use the present perfect I have presumed in the second clause?




  1. Having seen my best friend become an offender, I have always presumed that [something] caused his transition.


  2. Having seen my best friend becoming an offender, I have always presumed......







verbs participles







share|improve this question









New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Lawrence, Andrew Leach♦ 2 days ago


Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
















  • I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago











  • What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

    – Lawrence
    2 days ago











  • "Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

    – Luckyy
    2 days ago






  • 1





    It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

    – Jason Bassford
    2 days ago
















0















How do I form a correct perfect particle clauses sentence?



Do these sentences mean the same thing? Or does changing the verb change the meaning? Can I still use the present perfect I have presumed in the second clause?




  1. Having seen my best friend become an offender, I have always presumed that [something] caused his transition.


  2. Having seen my best friend becoming an offender, I have always presumed......







verbs participles







share|improve this question









New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Lawrence, Andrew Leach♦ 2 days ago


Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
















  • I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago











  • What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

    – Lawrence
    2 days ago











  • "Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

    – Luckyy
    2 days ago






  • 1





    It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

    – Jason Bassford
    2 days ago














0












0








0








How do I form a correct perfect particle clauses sentence?



Do these sentences mean the same thing? Or does changing the verb change the meaning? Can I still use the present perfect I have presumed in the second clause?




  1. Having seen my best friend become an offender, I have always presumed that [something] caused his transition.


  2. Having seen my best friend becoming an offender, I have always presumed......







verbs participles







share|improve this question









New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












How do I form a correct perfect particle clauses sentence?



Do these sentences mean the same thing? Or does changing the verb change the meaning? Can I still use the present perfect I have presumed in the second clause?




  1. Having seen my best friend become an offender, I have always presumed that [something] caused his transition.


  2. Having seen my best friend becoming an offender, I have always presumed......







verbs participles




verbs participles






share|improve this question









New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









Andrew Leach♦

79.7k8151256




79.7k8151256






New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









LuckyyLuckyy

42




42




New contributor




Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Luckyy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Lawrence, Andrew Leach♦ 2 days ago


Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.






put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Lawrence, Andrew Leach♦ 2 days ago


Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.















  • I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago











  • What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

    – Lawrence
    2 days ago











  • "Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

    – Luckyy
    2 days ago






  • 1





    It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

    – Jason Bassford
    2 days ago



















  • I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago











  • What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

    – Lawrence
    2 days ago











  • "Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

    – Andrew Leach♦
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

    – Luckyy
    2 days ago






  • 1





    It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

    – Jason Bassford
    2 days ago

















I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

– Andrew Leach♦
2 days ago





I've made the question less proof-reading, but I'm not sure whether you really mean "perfect particle" or "participle" or something else.

– Andrew Leach♦
2 days ago













What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

– Lawrence
2 days ago





What does the "perfect particle" (participle?) from your title and first sentence relate to the rest of the question?

– Lawrence
2 days ago













"Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

– Andrew Leach♦
2 days ago





"Having seen" is a perfect participle, but the question does appear to be about "become/becoming". The title (and the reference to it in the first line) is still unclear, but perhaps the rest of the question is not. However, Luckyy, if it's not what you want to ask, please feel free to correct it. "Perfect particle" needs to change in any case.

– Andrew Leach♦
2 days ago




1




1





I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

– Luckyy
2 days ago





I start to realize that my question is actually about "see do" or "see doing". I don't know the terminology for this. I think I should go to the English Learner stack exchange

– Luckyy
2 days ago




1




1





It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

– Jason Bassford
2 days ago





It's possible that ELL would be a better site, but you're still going to have to articulate what you're trying to ask there too.

– Jason Bassford
2 days ago










0






active

oldest

votes

















0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes

-

Popular posts from this blog

If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

Image
5 This question already has an answer here: How do you calculate the likelihood of drawing certain cards in your opening hand? 3 answers There is a funny modern deck where you play Treasure Hunt, but you really need to have it on the starting hand. How many mulligans should I take, if my deck contains 60 cards and contains 4 copies of Treasure Hunt? magic-the-gathering probability share | improve this question asked Nov 23 '18 at 12:12 dan dan 152 4
Read more

Alcedinidae

Image
Alcedinidae Martin-pêcheur à dos bleu ( Alcedo azurea ) Classification (COI) Règne Animalia Embranchement Chordata Sous-embr. Vertebrata Classe Aves Ordre Coraciiformes Famille Alcedinidae Rafinesque, 1815 Les Alcédinidés ou Alcedinidae forment une famille d'oiseaux plus connus sous les noms de martins-pêcheurs et martins-chasseurs. Sommaire 1 Description 2 Répartition et habitat 3 Systématique 3.1 Liste alphabétique des genres 3.2 Liste des espèces 4 Chez les Anciens : l'alcyon 4.1 Étymologie (Littré) 4.2 Oiseau « fabuleux » ? 5 Notes 6 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes 7.1 Bibliographie Description | Ce sont des oiseaux compacts de taille petite à moyenne (10 à 46 cm), au bec droit et long, en forme de poignard. Leurs pattes sont courtes, et ils portent un plumage aux couleurs vives. Répartition et habitat | Cosmopolites, ils fréquentent surtout
Read more

Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]

Image
9 $begingroup$ This question already has an answer here: What happens if we put together a proton and an antineutron? 2 answers Is it theoretically possible to make a "deuterium" atom containing a proton and an antineutron in its nucleus? Would the strong nuclear force cause attraction between a proton and an antineutron? Would such a nucleus be stable, or would the proton somehow annihilate the antineutron when close enough? nuclear-physics antimatter share | cite | improve this question asked yesterday
Read more