“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)

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

How can whole tone melodies sound more interesting?

Did Xerox really develop the first LAN?

Java 8 stream max() function argument type Comparator vs Comparable

Should gear shift center itself while in neutral?

How to assign captions for two tables in LaTeX?

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

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

Single word antonym of "flightless"

What does the "x" in "x86" represent?

What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?

Why are there no cargo aircraft with "flying wing" design?

Withdrew £2800, but only £2000 shows as withdrawn on online banking; what are my obligations?

When is phishing education going too far?

What is this single-engine low-wing propeller plane?

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

Do I really need recursive chmod to restrict access to a folder?

How can I fade player when goes inside or outside of the area?

Models of set theory where not every set can be linearly ordered

IndentationError when pasting code in Python 3 interpreter mode

Is there a way in Ruby to make just any one out of many keyword arguments required?

Is it possible to boil a liquid by just mixing many immiscible liquids together?

What are the motives behind Cersei's orders given to Bronn?

Check which numbers satisfy the condition [A*B*C = A! + B! + C!]



“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
    1 hour ago











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

    – phoog
    3 mins 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
      1 hour ago











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

      – phoog
      3 mins 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
      1 hour ago











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

      – phoog
      3 mins 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
      1 hour ago











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

      – phoog
      3 mins 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
      1 hour ago











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

      – phoog
      3 mins 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
    1 hour ago





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

    – Colin Fine
    1 hour ago













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

    – phoog
    3 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
    3 mins 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

            Jet Time Laivasto | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | NavigointivalikkoJet Time - The CompanyThe CompanyManagementJet Time aloittaa lauantaina Suomi-rekisterissä olevalla Boeing 737 -koneellaJettime Finland Fleet Details and HistoryJettime Fleet Details and HistoryRegional Jet OÜ takes over ATR production for SASJet Time Returns To Its Core BusinessYhtiön kotisivutlaajentamalla

            Olympian arkeologinen museo Sisällysluettelo Historia ja rakennus | Kokoelmat | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | Navigointivalikko37°38′36″N, 21°37′46″EInfobox OKArchaeological Museum of Olympia: HistoryArchaeological Museum of Olympia: DescriptionΜουσείο Ιστορίας των Ολυμπιακών Αγώνων της Αρχαιότητας: ΙστορικόArchaeological Museum of Olympia

            Äpy Sisällysluettelo Äpyt kautta historian | Esimerkkejä Äpy-huumorista | Katso myös | Kirjallisuutta | Aiheesta muualla | Navigointivalikkowww.äpy.fi