“Seemed to had” is it correct? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Are there tools or techniques to stop translating literally?Is this usage of the verb “had outfitted” correct?“Seemed connected” vs “Seemed to be connected.”Is “I have had to take a leave” correct?Is “I switched off television because I had exam the very next day.” correct?It seemed it's gonna take foreverUse of would had beenA teacher said to use “I don't need that” instead of “I won't be needing that” because there is no “continuous in modal verbs”Is “I had better ring him” grammatically correct?Had had (Is it a past perfect or past simple)

Gastric acid as a weapon

What happens to sewage if there is no river near by?

Output the ŋarâþ crîþ alphabet song without using (m)any letters

Why is black pepper both grey and black?

Does accepting a pardon have any bearing on trying that person for the same crime in a sovereign jurisdiction?

Is there a service that would inform me whenever a new direct route is scheduled from a given airport?

Do you forfeit tax refunds/credits if you aren't required to and don't file by April 15?

When to stop saving and start investing?

Does the Giant Rocktopus have a Swim Speed?

What's the purpose of writing one's academic bio in 3rd person?

What does '1 unit of lemon juice' mean in a grandma's drink recipe?

Did Xerox really develop the first LAN?

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

Single word antonym of "flightless"

Is a manifold-with-boundary with given interior and non-empty boundary essentially unique?

How can I make names more distinctive without making them longer?

IndentationError when pasting code in Python 3 interpreter mode

Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

How does cp -a work

Can a non-EU citizen traveling with me come with me through the EU passport line?

Why does Python start at index 1 when iterating an array backwards?

Is above average number of years spent on PhD considered a red flag in future academia or industry positions?

Does surprise arrest existing movement?



“Seemed to had” is it correct?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Are there tools or techniques to stop translating literally?Is this usage of the verb “had outfitted” correct?“Seemed connected” vs “Seemed to be connected.”Is “I have had to take a leave” correct?Is “I switched off television because I had exam the very next day.” correct?It seemed it's gonna take foreverUse of would had beenA teacher said to use “I don't need that” instead of “I won't be needing that” because there is no “continuous in modal verbs”Is “I had better ring him” grammatically correct?Had had (Is it a past perfect or past simple)



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1















Here's a sentence I made up:



"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"



Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.



Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:



"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"



Would it still be grammatical?










share|improve this question






















  • after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

    – Lambie
    1 hour ago

















1















Here's a sentence I made up:



"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"



Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.



Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:



"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"



Would it still be grammatical?










share|improve this question






















  • after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

    – Lambie
    1 hour ago













1












1








1








Here's a sentence I made up:



"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"



Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.



Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:



"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"



Would it still be grammatical?










share|improve this question














Here's a sentence I made up:



"He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him"



Is this sentence correct? I tried searching for similar sentences by putting quotation marks around 'seemed to had not', and out popped roughly 5-6 results, but that doesn't seem to be that many, especially because some of those could've been mistakes, and I couldn't find any questions like this.



Also, assuming it is correct, if I change the position of 'not', like so:



"He seemed to not had understood what I had said to him"



Would it still be grammatical?







grammar grammaticality






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 1 hour ago









FrostC0FrostC0

354210




354210












  • after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

    – Lambie
    1 hour ago

















  • after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

    – Lambie
    1 hour ago
















after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

– Lambie
1 hour ago





after to you need: the bare infinitive and perfect infinitive.

– Lambie
1 hour ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."



This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:




seem / appear to + infinitive



After seem and appear we often use a
to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
for past events).

...




So what you should say is either of:



  1. He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.


  2. He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.


  3. He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.


The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.






share|improve this answer

























  • The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

    – phoog
    1 hour ago












  • Thank you for the help!

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago











  • @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

    – Colin Fine
    58 mins ago











  • @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

    – phoog
    20 secs ago



















1














No,




He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.




is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.



Here's what you should use:




He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.







share|improve this answer


















  • 1





    Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago


















1














to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:



He seems to understand. [bare, present]



He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]



The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "481"
    ;
    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
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205625%2fseemed-to-had-is-it-correct%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









    4














    No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."



    This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:




    seem / appear to + infinitive



    After seem and appear we often use a
    to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
    for past events).

    ...




    So what you should say is either of:



    1. He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.


    2. He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.


    3. He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.


    The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.






    share|improve this answer

























    • The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

      – phoog
      1 hour ago












    • Thank you for the help!

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago











    • @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

      – Colin Fine
      58 mins ago











    • @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

      – phoog
      20 secs ago
















    4














    No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."



    This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:




    seem / appear to + infinitive



    After seem and appear we often use a
    to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
    for past events).

    ...




    So what you should say is either of:



    1. He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.


    2. He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.


    3. He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.


    The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.






    share|improve this answer

























    • The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

      – phoog
      1 hour ago












    • Thank you for the help!

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago











    • @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

      – Colin Fine
      58 mins ago











    • @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

      – phoog
      20 secs ago














    4












    4








    4







    No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."



    This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:




    seem / appear to + infinitive



    After seem and appear we often use a
    to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
    for past events).

    ...




    So what you should say is either of:



    1. He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.


    2. He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.


    3. He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.


    The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.






    share|improve this answer















    No matter where you put the "not", a statement with "to had" isn't grammatical. The construction you are using is "seem" + to-infinitive. The infinitive for the verb have/had is "to have", not "to had."



    This is discussed in detail on the BBC "Learning English" website:




    seem / appear to + infinitive



    After seem and appear we often use a
    to + infinitive construction ( or a perfect infinitive construction
    for past events).

    ...




    So what you should say is either of:



    1. He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.


    2. He seemed to have not understood what I had said to him.


    3. He seemed to not have understood what I had said to him.


    The "not" could really go in any of those 3 places, but the first possibility sounds smoother and more idiomatic. The last sentence sounds the least natural to me, even slightly awkward.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 1 hour ago

























    answered 1 hour ago









    Lorel C.Lorel C.

    4,7121510




    4,7121510












    • The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

      – phoog
      1 hour ago












    • Thank you for the help!

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago











    • @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

      – Colin Fine
      58 mins ago











    • @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

      – phoog
      20 secs ago


















    • The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

      – phoog
      1 hour ago












    • Thank you for the help!

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago











    • @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

      – Colin Fine
      58 mins ago











    • @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

      – phoog
      20 secs ago

















    The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

    – phoog
    1 hour ago






    The word order in sentences 2 and 3 has only become acceptable in the last 2 or 3 decades.

    – phoog
    1 hour ago














    Thank you for the help!

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago





    Thank you for the help!

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago













    @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

    – Colin Fine
    58 mins ago





    @phoog: I don't think the sticklers ever objected to 2 particularly, though they certainly did to 3.

    – Colin Fine
    58 mins ago













    @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

    – phoog
    20 secs ago






    @ColinFine in my experience it's not so much about sticklers as just the sentences that people would actually say or write.

    – phoog
    20 secs ago














    1














    No,




    He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.




    is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.



    Here's what you should use:




    He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.







    share|improve this answer


















    • 1





      Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago















    1














    No,




    He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.




    is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.



    Here's what you should use:




    He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.







    share|improve this answer


















    • 1





      Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago













    1












    1








    1







    No,




    He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.




    is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.



    Here's what you should use:




    He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.







    share|improve this answer













    No,




    He seemed to had not understood what I had said to him.




    is not grammatical at all, and neither is your other construction.



    Here's what you should use:




    He seemed not to have understood what I had said to him.








    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 1 hour ago









    RobustoRobusto

    12.5k23044




    12.5k23044







    • 1





      Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago












    • 1





      Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

      – FrostC0
      1 hour ago







    1




    1





    Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago





    Could you explain why it's incorrect, if you don't mind of course.

    – FrostC0
    1 hour ago











    1














    to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:



    He seems to understand. [bare, present]



    He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]



    The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.






    share|improve this answer



























      1














      to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:



      He seems to understand. [bare, present]



      He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]



      The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.






      share|improve this answer

























        1












        1








        1







        to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:



        He seems to understand. [bare, present]



        He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]



        The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.






        share|improve this answer













        to has to be followed by a bare infinitive or perfect infinitive:



        He seems to understand. [bare, present]



        He seems to have understood. [perfect infinitive, past idea or tense]



        The perfect infinitive is have + the past participle.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 1 hour ago









        LambieLambie

        17.6k1540




        17.6k1540



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners 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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205625%2fseemed-to-had-is-it-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Best approach to update all entries in a list that is paginated?Best way to add items to a paginated listChoose Your Country: Best Usability approachUpdate list when a user is viewing the list without annoying themWhen would the best day to update your webpage be?What should happen when I add a Row to a paginated, sorted listShould I adopt infinite scrolling or classical pagination?How to show user that page objects automatically updateWhat is the best location to locate the comments section in a list pageBest way to combine filtering and selecting items in a listWhen one of two inputs must be updated to satisfy a consistency criteria, which should you update (if at all)?

            Тонконіг бульбистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Екологія | Господарське значення | Примітки | Див. також | Література | Джерела | Посилання | Навігаційне меню1114601320038-241116202404kew-435458Poa bulbosaЭлектронный каталог сосудистых растений Азиатской России [Електронний каталог судинних рослин Азіатської Росії]Малышев Л. Л. Дикие родичи культурных растений. Poa bulbosa L. - Мятлик луковичный. [Малишев Л. Л. Дикі родичи культурних рослин. Poa bulbosa L. - Тонконіг бульбистий.]Мятлик (POA) Сем. Злаки (Мятликовые) [Тонконіг (POA) Род. Злаки (Тонконогові)]Poa bulbosa Linnaeus, Sp. Pl. 1: 70. 1753. 鳞茎早熟禾 lin jing zao shu he (Description from Flora of China) [Poa bulbosa Linnaeus, Sp. Pl. 1: 70. 1753. 鳞茎早熟禾 lin jing zao shu he (Опис від Флора Китаю)]Poa bulbosa L. – lipnice cibulkatá / lipnica cibulkatáPoa bulbosa в базі даних Poa bulbosa на сайті Poa bulbosa в базі даних «Global Biodiversity Information Facility» (GBIF)Poa bulbosa в базі даних «Euro + Med PlantBase» — інформаційному ресурсі для Євро-середземноморського розмаїття рослинPoa bulbosa L. на сайті «Плантариум»

            Вунгтау (аеропорт) Загальні відомості | Див. також | Посилання | Навігаційне меню10°22′00″ пн. ш. 107°05′00″ сх. д. / 10.36667° пн. ш. 107.08333° сх. д. / 10.36667; 107.0833310°22′00″ пн. ш. 107°05′00″ сх. д. / 10.36667° пн. ш. 107.08333° сх. д. / 10.36667; 107.083337731608Vinh AirportVinh airport facelift improves serviceвиправивши або дописавши їївиправивши або дописавши їїр