3

John was fortunate to receive the funding.

The statement uses the infinitive "to receive" instead of "to have received," which describes the state of having received something. "to have received" is correct because fortunate has the sense of describing a state instead of something dynamic like what is suggested by "to receive."

Is "to receive" correct grammar and why?

Improve this question
3
  • 2
    Hi, Joe. I am sure your English teacher from High School is proud of your attention to detail. I would consider the subtle distinction between "to receive" and "to have received" to be an interesting discussion of style. The use of "to receive" gets a grammatical green light.
    – ScotM
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 21:13
  • It is interesting in that it appears that both convey the same sense of receiving something in the past due to "was fortunate." The first version also is backtrack the receipt with respect to speaker's timeline due to the past tense; that sense is not limited to the second version. However the only difference is that the first makes it seem like a on shot transactional thing versus the other.
    – Joe Black
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 21:46
  • Generally, the main verb establishes the absolute time frame of the sentence, and all the other verbal phrases establish a relative time frame.
    – ScotM
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 22:01

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Both usages are idiomatic.

The main verb "was" establishes John's fortunate state of being in the past with respect to the speaker.

John was fortunate.

Adding the past perfect infinitive phrase "to have received the funding", adds details of John's fortunate state, showing that receipt of the funding shifts farther back in time with respect to the speaker's timeline.

"John was fortunate to have received the funding"

Adding the plain infinitive phrase "to receive the funding", adds similar detail to John's fortunate state, but shows no shift with respect to the speakers timeline.

"John was fortunate to receive the funding"

Both constructions of the infinitive are grammatically correct.

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    I am curious, @Erik Kowal , about them being "idiomatic".
    – ScotM
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 22:04
  • 1
    @ScotM - In other words, they would come naturally to a native speaker.
    – Erik Kowal
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 22:11
  • 1
    @ScotM The principal usage (as seen by its being listed first by non-historic dictionaries) of 'idiomatic', 'sounding natural to a native speaker', does not match the principal usage of 'idiom' in linguistics, 'a phrase etc in wide use but having unusual use of words and/or not employing normal grammar'.
    – Edwin Ashworth
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 22:40
  • That was the source of my curiosity, @EdwinAshworth, a technical distinction that I can appreciate.
    – ScotM
    Commented Dec 21, 2014 at 23:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .