Is this usage valid? Why, when, how, and why not?
Can the verb have been used to talk about experiencing a state of feeling or an action prompted and/or caused by an inanimate object?
“The song has me singing along to it, like I did a song from music.” The
song had me sing along to it. A song to me, “Last Moment: Why Do I Care For You…” Why
did The Book Keep Me Going Don’t Get Me Bored. ” The book kept me bored.
But I finally did it it would end with me getting bored. “The
weather had me sad and dark. Having my eyes on the sky, we can’t see any light.” “In
my opinion, I can’t have a happy life. ” But “When will you stop loving me? “
Quick answer – yes and no.
What can be the first two forms of questions? If the “to it” is confusing or awkward at the end of the sentence, there’s always a case of “to it.” “To” is a preposition and “it” is the object. “To” implies something moving toward the object (it) (see Figure 8-25). In Latin, “to” implies something moving towards the object. Is something moving toward” the object? So, to sing along to it indicates singing to the song in the same way a singer sings to a singing audience, rather than letting out swaying voice. This is not a wrong but is an awkward use. To sing along with it would be another normal use. The use of the word “had” in the song “the song had me singing” implies the song made you sing along. Again, this is not wrong, but is not normal use.
Why is there an awkwardness to my statements? If a movie reviewer was trying to pique interest in his review, he might say “the movie had me sitting on the edge of my seat the whole time. I really should watch that.” What is the “Why? The description below begs an explanation of how or why the song had you singing, the book had you bored, or the weather had you sad. Each could be correct, but are not normal use, and they beg context. Without context, the most ugly thing appears either wrong or awkward.
So generally, you should not use “had” the way you are. If you use the word “had”, you can use it just fine, but “we did” has to be in context – you have to explain how or why, it will appear to be
misused.
The construction provides a way of shifting responsibility away from a person onto the subject of the “have”. Those who wrote “I was singing along to the recording” (in Hindi) could well’ve easily wrote something that you could have written and sung along. But saying “the recording had me singing along to it” makes the recording responsible. Have you ever been, against your will, simply carried away?
Note that the subject of “have” is often also mentioned later in a sentence, to supply its literal role in the event.
The construction provides a way of shifting responsibility away from a person onto the subject of the “have”. Those who wrote “I was singing along to the recording” (in Hindi) could well’ve easily wrote something that you could have written and sung along. But saying “the recording had me singing along to it” makes the recording responsible. Have you ever been, against your will, simply carried away?
Note that the subject of “have” is often also mentioned later in a sentence, to supply its literal role in the event.
The construction provides a way of shifting responsibility away from a person onto the subject of the “have”. Those who wrote “I was singing along to the recording” (in Hindi) could well’ve easily wrote something that you could have written and sung along. But saying “the recording had me singing along to it” makes the recording responsible. Have you ever been, against your will, simply carried away?
Note that the subject of “have” is often also mentioned later in a sentence, to supply its literal role in the event.
The construction provides a way of shifting responsibility away from a person onto the subject of the “have”. Those who wrote “I was singing along to the recording” (in Hindi) could well’ve easily wrote something that you could have written and sung along. But saying “the recording had me singing along to it” makes the recording responsible. Have you ever been, against your will, simply carried away?
Note that the subject of “have” is often also mentioned later in a sentence, to supply its literal role in the event.
The construction provides a way of shifting responsibility away from a person onto the subject of the “have”. Those who wrote “I was singing along to the recording” (in Hindi) could well’ve easily wrote something that you could have written and sung along. But saying “the recording had me singing along to it” makes the recording responsible. Have you ever been, against your will, simply carried away?
Note that the subject of “have” is often also mentioned later in a sentence, to supply its literal role in the event.
