0

  1. After spending so many years working in hospitals, one would expect the doctor to have retired.

  2. After spending so many years working in hospitals, one would expect the doctor to retire.

Q1) Do they both mean the same?

Q2) What is the subject of "spending". Is it "one" or is it "the doctor"? In other words, is this a case of "dangling modifier"?

Mr. X
  • 651
  • 1
    (1) is a perfect infinitive. It implies not only (2) but that the doctor has not retired yet. I would tend to read "the doctor" as the subject of "spending" in both cases, though the sentences are poorly constructed. I find it harder to read "one" as its subject than personal pronouns like "I", "she" etc. – Pax Aug 20 '20 at 23:06

1 Answers1

1

The meanings are as follows but the words in bold need not be said/written, as they are implied in the tense of the verb

  1. After spending so many years working in hospitals, one would expect the doctor to have already retired.

  2. After spending so many years working in hospitals, one would expect the doctor to retire at sometime between now and the near future."

Q2) What is the subject of "spending".

Spending does not have a clear subject because you have not given sufficient context.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • In both 1) and 2), does the "after..." clause mean the doctor has already spent many years working...? – Mr. X Aug 20 '20 at 09:28
  • 2
    @Mr.X clause mean the doctor has already spent many years working...? Please read my answer. Spending does not have a clear subject because you have not given sufficient context. It is not possible to say who has spent "so many years working in hospitals," – Greybeard Aug 20 '20 at 10:04
  • 1
    I think the grammatical structure tends to imply that it is "one" that has spent many years working in hospitals, but without more context that doesn't make sense semantically because it doesn't explain at all why the doctor might be expected to retire. Conversely if we interpret it to mean that it's the doctor who spent those years then that completely explains why they might be expected to retire. So yes, as written it's open to interpretation, but if you put a gun to my head and made me choose a meaning I know which I'd opt for. – nnnnnn Aug 20 '20 at 10:08
  • @Mr.X context would decide the subject of "spending" - Exactly. – Greybeard Aug 20 '20 at 10:22
  • @Greybeard, You say, "Spending does not have a clear subject because you have not given sufficient context" in other words, context would decide the subject of "spending". My question: Do you mean the concept of "dangling modifiers" is not so important because context could almost always clear up the issue? – Mr. X Aug 20 '20 at 10:26
  • 1
    No I do not mean the concept of "dangling modifiers" is not so important. A dangling modifier, by definition, is ambiguous regardless of context. Dangling modifiers cease to be dangling modifiers when the subject becomes clear. See Purdue Owl at https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/mechanics/dangling_modifiers_and_how_to_correct_them.html – Greybeard Aug 20 '20 at 10:39
  • What if I add some more context or a sentence, for example: is the sentence below possible?-----

    My friend John is a doctor working in hospitals. After spending* years working in hospitals, one would expect him to have retired.*

     – Mr. X Aug 21 '20 at 08:26