[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

File: 81 KB, 396x388, this is it.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

7470432

Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:35:03 2015 No.7470432 [Reply] [Original]

>had had

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:35:36 2015 No.7470435 >>7470432 This gets me too, but what's the fucking alternative?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:36:14 2015 No.7470439 Just wrote "had had" for a work report 5 minutes ago. Feels good senpai.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:39:07 2015 No.7470450 >tfw you can reword the sentence relief >tfw you can't. It's like being jabbed in the throat.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:39:53 2015 No.7470457 >>7470432 >an historic

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:41:08 2015 No.7470459 File: 19 KB, 382x333, 1421895705194.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >'d had

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:42:16 2015 No.7470464 All of the joy he had had had had no effect on his wife.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:42:55 2015 No.7470467 File: 111 KB, 251x246, otd.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7470457 >a hour >a half hour

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:43:42 2015 No.7470470 >>7470464 am I right in thinking that you can have an infinite number of "had had"s and it would make sense as long as you were implicitly referring to a chain of different events?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:45:31 2015 No.7470478 >>7470432 Gaddis does this all the time.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:49:30 2015 No.7470500 >>7470470 You're right indeed.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:49:31 2015 No.7470501 File: 71 KB, 707x500, ENOUGH.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >that that

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:51:26 2015 No.7470507 >is is

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:51:27 2015 No.7470508 >>7470470 It would then have to be an infinite chain of events, which is impossible. Therefore, I proved you wrong. Next.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:53:02 2015 No.7470515 James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 14:53:05 2015 No.7470516 >>7470470 Sounds like it would be a valid mathematical induction proof to me, anon

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 15:24:55 2015 No.7470658 File: 17 KB, 240x320, 1444514170576.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >do do

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 16:06:54 2015 No.7470777 >That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 16:06:58 2015 No.7470779 >>7470435 "he had had" can be fixed like this: "he'd had"

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 16:10:05 2015 No.7470786 >>7470515 James, while John had had "had", had had "had had"; "had had" had had a better effect on the teacher.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 16:16:12 2015 No.7470806 >>7470470 I've got an idea for the next pomo masterpiece.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 17:03:57 2015 No.7471030 but is had'd had possible ?

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 16 17:05:01 2015 No.7471035 >>7471030 idk desu senpai