Why do people say “I have known someone to do” but not “I know someone to do”?












10














The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:




I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)



I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.



I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.




In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?






phrases expressions structure







share|improve this question


















  • 4




    Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
    – Robusto
    Dec 23 at 15:25






  • 1




    I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
    – FumbleFingers
    Dec 23 at 15:41






  • 1




    This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
    – jlovegren
    Dec 23 at 15:55








  • 1




    I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:45








  • 1




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:46
















10














The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:




I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)



I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.



I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.




In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?






phrases expressions structure







share|improve this question


















  • 4




    Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
    – Robusto
    Dec 23 at 15:25






  • 1




    I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
    – FumbleFingers
    Dec 23 at 15:41






  • 1




    This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
    – jlovegren
    Dec 23 at 15:55








  • 1




    I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:45








  • 1




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:46














10












10








10







The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:




I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)



I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.



I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.




In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?






phrases expressions structure







share|improve this question













The structure I have known someone to do something is apparently considered grammatical and idiomatic. Examples from Google:




I have known people to take shops, put in a few articles and, without opening the doors, to sell the premises for as much as £1,000. (New Zealand Parliament)



I have known people to temporarily lose interest in sex and believe the problem was in their marriage but later realize that it was grief.



I have known people to lose battles with brain tumours, cancer, to become disabled, and to become very ill.




In contrast, I know/knew someone to do something is not a thing that people say. Apparently you can't say "I knew some people to drink coffee around midnight.*" Why is that? What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?






phrases expressions structure




phrases expressions structure






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Dec 23 at 15:19









L. Moneta

282114




282114








  • 4




    Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
    – Robusto
    Dec 23 at 15:25






  • 1




    I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
    – FumbleFingers
    Dec 23 at 15:41






  • 1




    This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
    – jlovegren
    Dec 23 at 15:55








  • 1




    I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:45








  • 1




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:46














  • 4




    Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
    – Robusto
    Dec 23 at 15:25






  • 1




    I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
    – FumbleFingers
    Dec 23 at 15:41






  • 1




    This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
    – jlovegren
    Dec 23 at 15:55








  • 1




    I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:45








  • 1




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
    – David
    Dec 23 at 16:46








4




4




Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 at 15:25




Good question. I believe that this is merely customary, but you almost certainly should get a better answer than that. Welcome to EL&U.
– Robusto
Dec 23 at 15:25




1




1




I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 23 at 15:41




I know someone to fix her car is just a less common version of I know someone who can fix her car. But I have known someone to fix her car is a completely different utterance. Often, the speaker wouldn't actually be acquainted with anyone who had previously fixed her car - it just means I am aware that [at least once] in the past someone fixed her car.
– FumbleFingers
Dec 23 at 15:41




1




1




This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
– jlovegren
Dec 23 at 15:55






This construction was probably originally a calque from Latin where the verb in the matrix clause was usually in its passive past participle form. Notice also that you have "Thomas is said to frequent 4th street." but not "*They say Thomas to frequent 4th street." I'll post an answer if I can confirm this with some Latin examples!
– jlovegren
Dec 23 at 15:55






1




1




I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
– David
Dec 23 at 16:45






I know him to buy paintings at auctions; I know her to spend hours reading gravestones in churchyards; I know them to be fighting the government on several issues. Less familiar to the non-native speaker, but nothing special about the structure — it can work in the present tense if it is transformed properly, as in my examples.
– David
Dec 23 at 16:45






1




1




I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
– David
Dec 23 at 16:46




I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a false premise, as explained in my comment.
– David
Dec 23 at 16:46










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















6














There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.



Compare:




I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)




to




I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)




The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."






share|improve this answer























  • While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 17:50












  • That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 17:54












  • "Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 18:18












  • "What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 18:31








  • 1




    @FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 21:37



















0














To answer why is a context about time.



If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.



For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.



On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.



For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.






share|improve this answer





















  • This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:07



















-1














Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:




I know people take shops, ...



I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...



I know people lose battles ...




Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:04










  • @JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
    – Pete Kirkham
    Dec 25 at 0:27






  • 1




    No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 25 at 0:33











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
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%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478300%2fwhy-do-people-say-i-have-known-someone-to-do-but-not-i-know-someone-to-do%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









6














There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.



Compare:




I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)




to




I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)




The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."






share|improve this answer























  • While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 17:50












  • That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 17:54












  • "Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 18:18












  • "What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 18:31








  • 1




    @FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 21:37
















6














There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.



Compare:




I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)




to




I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)




The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."






share|improve this answer























  • While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 17:50












  • That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 17:54












  • "Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 18:18












  • "What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 18:31








  • 1




    @FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 21:37














6












6








6






There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.



Compare:




I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)




to




I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)




The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."






share|improve this answer














There is a difference in what you want to imply. Have known communicates that you are aware of at least some cases in which your statement has been true in the past. (It may or may not be true currently). Know means you think it's true in general.



Compare:




I've known him to get up early in the morning (= He's capable of it. He might do it again, even if he has possibly stopped.)




to




I know him to get up early in the morning (= He ususally does it.)




The second is in the same vein as "I know him to be a nice guy."







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Dec 23 at 17:59

























answered Dec 23 at 17:45









Tushar Raj

18.6k864112




18.6k864112












  • While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 17:50












  • That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 17:54












  • "Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 18:18












  • "What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 18:31








  • 1




    @FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 21:37


















  • While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 17:50












  • That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 17:54












  • "Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 18:18












  • "What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
    – Tushar Raj
    Dec 23 at 18:31








  • 1




    @FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
    – L. Moneta
    Dec 23 at 21:37
















While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 17:50






While I agree with the distinction you make with tenses, that is not the crux of my question. The fact that I know him to get up early returns exactly naught troubles me.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 17:50














That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 at 17:54






That's way too narrow. Here. Contrast sentences like "I know him to be rich/evil/sick" with "I've known him to be rich/evil/sick."
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 at 17:54














"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 18:18






"Know someone/something to be" is a different story. As evidenced by the title, there is no question there to begin with.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 18:18














"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 at 18:31






"What is special about the structure I have known someone to do something that validates it as grammatical?" Nothing. Both constructs are grammatical and have distinct meanings, as I have demonstrated. Evidently one of them is significantly less popular, but usage patterns have nothing to do with grammatical validity. If you don't like be rich, you can try similar experiments with things like get angry when... or have patience and so on. Your OP was about grammar and meaning, so I answered keeping that in mind. I can't vouch for usage.
– Tushar Raj
Dec 23 at 18:31






1




1




@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 21:37




@FumbleFingers This is a very helpful comment.
– L. Moneta
Dec 23 at 21:37













0














To answer why is a context about time.



If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.



For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.



On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.



For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.






share|improve this answer





















  • This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:07
















0














To answer why is a context about time.



If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.



For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.



On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.



For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.






share|improve this answer





















  • This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:07














0












0








0






To answer why is a context about time.



If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.



For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.



On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.



For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.






share|improve this answer












To answer why is a context about time.



If I say, “I have known someone to do”, then I’m reflecting on my experience, memory and past. The details of such a context tend to be abstract more often than not.



For example: “I have known John Doe to go fishing on Sundays.” This is reference of memory over a long period of time. John typically goes fishing on Sundays that I can remember over the past 5 years. The sentence merely shortens time as an abstraction of unknown amount of time.



On the other hand, “I know someone who may fish with you” is more in the present moment or immediate future.



For example: You are going fishing this afternoon or tomorrow? Well I know someone who may join you.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 23 at 17:42









James Axsom

583




583












  • This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:07


















  • This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:07
















This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 at 9:07




This doesn’t really explain anything – it’s just a description of how the phrase is used, not a reason why. There’s no reason you shouldn’t be able to use the same construction to express your experience in the present tense. “I’ve known John to go fishing on Sundays” means roughly “I’ve known for a while that John often goes fishing on Sundays”; so why not “I know that John often goes fishing on Sundays” in the present tense? That is the question which was asked.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 at 9:07











-1














Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:




I know people take shops, ...



I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...



I know people lose battles ...




Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:04










  • @JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
    – Pete Kirkham
    Dec 25 at 0:27






  • 1




    No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 25 at 0:33
















-1














Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:




I know people take shops, ...



I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...



I know people lose battles ...




Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:04










  • @JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
    – Pete Kirkham
    Dec 25 at 0:27






  • 1




    No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 25 at 0:33














-1












-1








-1






Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:




I know people take shops, ...



I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...



I know people lose battles ...




Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.






share|improve this answer














Comparing with the more familiar 'I go to the shops' and 'I have gone to the shops', this has the form of a perfect past, and the equivalent present would be:




I know people take shops, ...



I know people temporarily lose interest in sex ...



I know people lose battles ...




Just like you have 'I used to eat strawberries' vs 'I eat strawberries', when the construct takes the form of the past (I would say that 'I have known' is describing past experience, that is certainly the meaning it always has had to me, I do not see it describing present events as Janus suggests below, a pattern of behaviour is established over past time and so it takes the form of past perfect). Many constructs use the infinitive when voiced in the past or in the abstract but not in the present, this one isn't special.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Dec 25 at 21:16

























answered Dec 23 at 23:25









Pete Kirkham

28217




28217








  • 1




    This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:04










  • @JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
    – Pete Kirkham
    Dec 25 at 0:27






  • 1




    No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 25 at 0:33














  • 1




    This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 24 at 9:04










  • @JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
    – Pete Kirkham
    Dec 25 at 0:27






  • 1




    No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Dec 25 at 0:33








1




1




This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 at 9:04




This is a completely different construction which isn’t really relevant to the question. Your examples all use complement clauses (“I know that X is the case”), whereas people is the direct object in the original sentences. The two constructions are fundamentally different – they’re also not limited to a particular tense (“I knew that people lose battles”, “I’ve always known that people lose battles” v. “I know these people to have great courage”).
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 24 at 9:04












@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 at 0:27




@JanusBahsJacquet my understanding is that 'I have known' is the past of 'I know', how would you transfer the original construction into the present?
– Pete Kirkham
Dec 25 at 0:27




1




1




No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 at 0:33




No, ‘I have known’ is the present tense of a perfect construction built with the verb know; the past tense would be ‘I knew’. Transferring the examples in the question yields exactly the constructions also mentioned in the question and in my previous comment: “I know people to take shops / temporarily lose interest in sex / lose battles”. The whole issue is that this is ungrammatical (at least to most speakers), for whatever reason, except with certain verbs.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Dec 25 at 0:33


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage 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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478300%2fwhy-do-people-say-i-have-known-someone-to-do-but-not-i-know-someone-to-do%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

數位音樂下載

Image
數位音樂下載 為非以「實體」方式來販賣音樂的相關產品，而使用數位格式如mp3、AAC等文件格式來進行銷售販賣的一种音乐产业形式。著名的數位音樂下載服務商有iTunes Store、RecoChoku、Google Play音乐和微软Zune等。数字音乐下载在二十一世纪初一度风靡全球， [1] [2] 使得传统唱片产业走向衰落，但其自身也在2010年代流媒体音乐服务如Apple Music、Spotify等的挤压下迅速失去市场份额。 [3] [4] 数字音乐下载有便于携带、传播迅速、制作简单成本低等优点，与流媒体音乐相比也能更好保障音乐人权益； [5] 但它同时很可能带来侵犯版权和滥用的情形， [6] 也给音乐产业带来了诸多不利影响。数字音乐下载为音乐人和乐迷提供了更加便捷直接的交流渠道，也一定程度上推动了网络音乐人的出现和独立音乐的迅速发展。 [7] 目录 1 历史 1.1 技术积淀（1987-2000） 1.2 出现与兴起（2000-2004） 1.3 唱片市场的颠覆者（2004-2007） 1.4 巅峰和衰落（2005-2013） 1.5 摇摇欲坠的现状与不可预知的明天（2014至今） 2 主要文件格式 2.1 PCM编码格式 2.1.1 WAV 2.1.2 APE 2.1.3 FLAC 2.2 苹果推出的无损文件格式 2.2.1 AIFF 2.2.2 ALAC 2.3 有损压缩格式 2.3.1 MP3 2.3.2 AAC 3 主要市场 3.1 iTunes Store 3.2 Google Play音乐商店 3.3 亚马逊音乐商店 3.4 部分其他音乐商店 4 影响与评价 4.1 对音乐产业的影响 4.2 对科技行业的影响 4.3 正面评价 4.4 负面评价 4.4.1 侵权问题 4.4.2 经营模式不明晰 4.4.3 不适应移动时代 4.5 文化现象 5 延伸阅读 6 参考资料 历史 苹果iTunes+iPod的软硬件搭配让数字音
Read more

格利澤436b

Image
格利泽436b 太陽系外行星 太陽系外行星列表 艺术家笔下的格利泽436b 母恆星 母恆星 Gliese 436 星座 獅子座 赤經 ( α ) 11 h  42 m  11.0941 s [1] 赤緯 ( δ ) +26° 42′ 23.652″ [1] 距離 33.4 ly (10.2 pc) 光譜類型 M2.5 V [1] 軌道參數 半长轴 ( a ) 0.0291±0.0004 [2] AU 軌道離心率 ( e ) 0.150±0.012 [2] 公轉週期 ( P ) 2.643904±0.000005 [3] d (0.00723849 y) 軌道傾角 ( i ) 85.8 +0.21 −0.25 [3] ° 角距 ( θ ) 2.794 mas 近星點時間 ( T 0 ) 2,451,551.716 ±0.01 JD 半振幅 ( K ) 18.68±0.8 m/s 物理性质 质量 ( m ) 22.2±1.0 [2] M ⊕ 半徑 ( r ) 4.327±0.183 [2] [4] R ⊕ 密度 ( ρ ) 1.51 g cm -3 表面重力 ( g ) 1.18 g 溫度 ( T ) 712±36 [2] K 發現 發現時間 2004 發現者 巴特勒、沃格特、 馬西 et al. 發現方法 徑向速度、凌日法 發現地點 美國加利福尼亞州 發表論文 出版 其他名稱 Ross 905 b, GJ 436 b, [5] LTT 13213 b, GCTP 2704.10 b, LHS 310, AC+27:28217 b, Vyssotsky 616 b, HIP 57087 b, GEN# +9.80120068 b, LP 319-75 b, G 121-7 b, LSPM J1142+2642 b, 1RXS J114211.9+264328 b, ASCC 683818 b, G 147-68 b, UCAC2 41198281 b, BP
Read more

When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

Image
2 I don't know why balance of the address is 0. when can this situation? etherscan balances share | improve this question asked yesterday Ru Hi Ru Hi 11 1 New contributor Ru Hi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment  | 
Read more