>had had
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
>had had
>>7470432
This gets me too, but what's the fucking alternative?
Just wrote "had had" for a work report 5 minutes ago. Feels good senpai.
>tfw you can reword the sentence
relief
>tfw you can't.
It's like being jabbed in the throat.
>>7470432
>an historic
>'d had
All of the joy he had had had had no effect on his wife.
>>7470457
>a hour
>a half hour
>>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?
>>7470432
Gaddis does this all the time.
>>7470470
You're right indeed.
>that that
>is is
>>7470470
It would then have to be an infinite chain of events, which is impossible. Therefore, I proved you wrong. Next.
James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher
>>7470470
Sounds like it would be a valid mathematical induction proof to me, anon
>do do
>That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is
>>7470435
"he had had"
can be fixed like this:
"he'd had"
>>7470515
James, while John had had "had", had had "had had"; "had had" had had a better effect on the teacher.
>>7470470
I've got an idea for the next pomo masterpiece.
but is had'd had possible ?
>>7471030
idk desu senpai
