Why do people say “I have known someone to do” but not “I know someone to do”?
The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:
I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)
I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.
I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.
In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?
phrases expressions structure
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
add a comment |
The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:
I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)
I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.
I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.
In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?
phrases expressions structure
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
4
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday
add a comment |
The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:
I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)
I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.
I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.
In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?
phrases expressions structure
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:
I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)
I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.
I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.
In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?
phrases expressions structure
phrases expressions structure
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
asked Dec 23 '18 at 15:19
L. Moneta
1
1
4
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday
add a comment |
4
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday
4
4
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.
Compare:
I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)
to
I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)
The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't likebe rich, you can try similar experiments with things likeget angry when...orhave patienceand so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
|
show 4 more comments
To answer why is a context about time.
If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.
For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.
On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.
For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
add a comment |
Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:
I know people take shops, ...
I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...
I know people lose battles ...
Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478300%2fwhy-do-people-say-i-have-known-someone-to-do-but-not-i-know-someone-to-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.
Compare:
I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)
to
I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)
The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't likebe rich, you can try similar experiments with things likeget angry when...orhave patienceand so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
|
show 4 more comments
There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.
Compare:
I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)
to
I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)
The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't likebe rich, you can try similar experiments with things likeget angry when...orhave patienceand so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
|
show 4 more comments
There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.
Compare:
I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)
to
I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)
The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.
Compare:
I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)
to
I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)
The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
edited Dec 23 '18 at 17:59
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:45
Tushar Raj
18.6k864112
18.6k864112
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't likebe rich, you can try similar experiments with things likeget angry when...orhave patienceand so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
|
show 4 more comments
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't likebe rich, you can try similar experiments with things likeget angry when...orhave patienceand so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 17:50
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 17:54
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 18:18
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like
be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like
be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 '18 at 18:31
1
1
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 '18 at 21:37
|
show 4 more comments
To answer why is a context about time.
If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.
For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.
On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.
For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
add a comment |
To answer why is a context about time.
If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.
For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.
On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.
For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
add a comment |
To answer why is a context about time.
If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.
For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.
On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.
For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
To answer why is a context about time.
If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.
For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.
On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.
For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
answered Dec 23 '18 at 17:42
James Axsom
583
583
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
add a comment |
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:07
add a comment |
Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:
I know people take shops, ...
I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...
I know people lose battles ...
Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
add a comment |
Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:
I know people take shops, ...
I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...
I know people lose battles ...
Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
add a comment |
Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:
I know people take shops, ...
I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...
I know people lose battles ...
Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:
I know people take shops, ...
I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...
I know people lose battles ...
Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
edited Dec 25 '18 at 21:16
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
answered Dec 23 '18 at 23:25
Pete Kirkham
28217
28217
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
add a comment |
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
1
1
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 '18 at 9:04
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 '18 at 0:27
1
1
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 '18 at 0:33
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478300%2fwhy-do-people-say-i-have-known-someone-to-do-but-not-i-know-someone-to-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 '18 at 15:25
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Andrew Leach♦
yesterday