22

I am currently working on the English idiomatic phrase "Someone is said (to do/to be doing/to have done) something," and, try as I might, I cannot find any worthwhile piece of information about the question I am asking myself.

Provided that…

  • "It is said that John is a spy." becomes "John is said to be a spy." (Simple Infinitive)
  • "It is said that John is having an affair." becomes "John is said to be having an affair." (Continuous Infinitive)
  • "It is said that John has spent some time in jail." becomes "John is said to have spent some time in jail." (Perfect Infinitive)

what, then, does "It is said that John will leave for good." become? Is there anything in English like a future infinitive?

John is said to be to leave for good. (?)

MarcInManhattan
  • 7,930
user58319
  • 4,084
  • 6
    No such thing as future infinitive in English or in other modern European languages. The way to phrase what you want to say in the passive form would be "John is said to be going to (or about to) leave for good" – Trunk Sep 27 '20 at 12:43
  • 2
    Why did you change the activity in your example? In the interest of parallelism, why not provide examples of: "to spy", "to be spying", "to have spied". – Wyck Sep 28 '20 at 13:39

6 Answers6

52

In tenses where we can't use auxiliary verbs, will is replaced by going to:

John is said to be going to leave for good.

However, most of the time we'd just use the present continuous, even though it's a future event:

John is said to be leaving for good.

Peter Shor
  • 88,407
  • 4
    It’s difficult to improve on your answer, short and sweet. The other possibilities are all more cumbersome and less natural. – tchrist Sep 27 '20 at 01:37
  • 18
    Boldly going to go where no one will have gone before. – candied_orange Sep 27 '20 at 14:20
  • Is there any reason John is said to leave for good cannot mean "It is said that John will leave for good"? – listeneva Sep 28 '20 at 07:38
  • 3
    @listeneva: My impression is that the verb tense "John is said to X" usually doesn't tell you what John is going to do, but what John habitually does. So "John is said to talk in his sleep" would be idiomatic, but "John is said to leave for good" means that people say that John has left for good multiple times. – Peter Shor Sep 28 '20 at 11:43
  • @PeterShor Do you (or anyone else) have any sources to support this answer? – Kyamond Nov 15 '23 at 21:51
  • @Kyamond: Wikipedia says : "Will can be replaced by am/is/are going to. This can supply the past and other forms." – Peter Shor Nov 16 '23 at 01:13
14

Future Infinitives?

I don’t mean to detract from the clarity and correctness of Peter Shor’s answer. You should use what he said to use here. I’d like to address the theoretical notion of “future infinitives” in English.

Mind you, Ancient Latin did have infinitives inflected for tense and voice, and Modern Portuguese today has so-called “personal” infinitives which are inflected for person and number.

But not English. You cannot inflect an English infinitive.

What English does have

Here are the four most common infinitive constructions in English:

  1. infinitive: to hold him responsible
  2. perfect infinitive: to have held him responsible
  3. passive infinitive: (for) him to be held responsible
  4. perfect passive infinitive: (for) him to have been held responsible

There is no future to be seen there. That’s because the infinitive in English — such as be, have, go, or hold — is morphologically inert: it lacks any vestige of inflectional morphology. Try as you may, you cannot fiddle its internal bits to produce some alternate form of the base verb that now expresses traits like its person or number, time or mood, voice or aspect, or even its grammatical relationships with other syntactic constituents.

It’s not that English is incapable of expressing those traits in its infinitive constructions. You simply have to include various extra words along with your infinitives when you want to express those ideas.

So let’s look at some of those specific approaches in the context of your question.

Concrete Approaches

Here we talk about a past event in various ways:

  • John left yesterday. (a past event)
  • They say that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the present)
  • They said that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the past)
  • They will say that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the future)
  • It is said that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the present)
  • It was said that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the past)
  • It will be said that John left yesterday. (a past event described in the future)
  • John is said to have left yesterday. (a past event described in the present)
  • John was said to have left yesterday. (a past event described in the past)
  • John will be said to have left yesterday. (a past event described in the future)

Just keep in mind that this version also talks about a past event in the present, but it has the added connotation that you're sure he did so:

  • John will have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of)

Which leads to this sort of thing:

  • They say that John will have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of described in the present)
  • They said that John will have left yesterday.(a past event you're sure of described in the past)
  • They will say that John will have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of described in the future)
  • John is said to have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of described in the present)
  • John was said to have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of described in the present)
  • John will be said to have left yesterday. (a past event you're sure of described in the future)

Here we talk about a future event in various ways:

  • John will leave tomorrow. (a future event)
  • They say that John will leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • They said that John would leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • They will say that John will leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • It is said that John will leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • It was said that John would leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • It will be said that John will leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)

However, these versions don't sound as good:

  • John is said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • John was said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • John will be said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)

That's because we prefer to use be plus a nonfinite verb form to talk about the "normal" present in English. Here are three ways, of which the last is the most customary:

  • John leaves today. (present of leave)
  • John is to leave today. (present of be to plus infinitive of leave)
  • John is leaving today. (present of be plus progressive of leave)

Choosing the last of those, meaning be plus a progressive, makes it easier to convert to your formulation using John is said to plus the infinitive:

  • John is said to be leaving today. (present of be said to plus infinitive of be leaving)
  • John was said to be leaving today. (past of be said to plus infinitive of be leaving)
  • John will be said to be leaving today. (present of be said to plus infinitive of be leaving)

Those can all also refer to future events—and arguably, they already do so. You can make this shift in time more obvious by changing today to tomorrow.

  • John leaves tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • John is to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • John is leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)

Which leads to your be said to forms in this way:

  • John is said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • John was said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • John will be said to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)

  • John is said to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • John was said to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • John will be said to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • John will have been said to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)

And a very great many they say variants:

  • They say that John is leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • They say that John will be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • They say that John is to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)
  • They say that John is to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the present)

  • They said that John is leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • They said that John was leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • They said that John would be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • They said that John was to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)
  • They said that John was to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past)

  • They will have said that John is leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)
  • They will have said that John was leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)
  • They will have said that John would be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)
  • They will have said that John was to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)
  • They will have said that John was to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the past with certainty)

  • They will say that John leaves tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John is to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John is leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John will be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John is to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John was to leave tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)
  • They will say that John was to be leaving tomorrow. (a future event described in the future)

Summary

The English strategy of adding separate little words for whatever trait you want to express may seem more complicated than in Romance languages like French, Italian, Spanish, or Portuguese, but the flexibility it affords us is more combinatorially expressive in the long run.

tchrist
  • 134,759
  • 2
    Arguably, "to have held" is then also not so much a perfect infinitive per se but a participle of "hold" to which we are "adding separate little words" so that the result functions as a perfect infinitive. – Hagen von Eitzen Sep 27 '20 at 19:45
  • 2
    @HagenvonEitzen That's exactly right. In to have held, you have have as the infinitive and held as perfect participle. Even marking an infinitive with to (as with zu in German) is still just a little word added to it, and we don't have to do that in all circumstances either. When I make him go home, I don’t mark that infinitive with to because make doesn’t require that of its infinitive complements. But in subject position the infinitive clause actually needs to be doubly marked when the infinitive itself has its own subject, as in For him to go home is all I can expect. – tchrist Sep 27 '20 at 20:30
  • Why do you think John is said to leave for good doesn't mean It is said that John will leave for good? – listeneva Sep 28 '20 at 07:25
  • @listeneva Because that would make it an habitual action rather than some pending future event. It's like with saying “John is said to eat snails”; that's habitual. – tchrist Sep 29 '20 at 02:01
  • The "little words" in the summary are called "particles" and at least Spanish does have them. Spanish also has a future tense, which English does not, as the exploration in the answer illustrates. – hippietrail May 23 '23 at 08:09
3

“John is said to be going to leave for good” is the closest I can suggest. Here is relevant material from the Cambridge dictionary ...

Future: be going to (I am going to work)
Grammar > Verbs > Tenses and time > Future > Future: be going to (I am going to work) from English Grammar Today

We use “be going to” + the base form of the verb:

I’m going to take a few exams at the end of the year.

It’s going to be difficult to get a job during the summer as the tourist industry is suffering from the economic downturn.

Cambridge dictionary

Anton
  • 28,634
  • 3
  • 42
  • 81
2

John is to leave for good it is said, would be my first thought. Although, it is not natural in my head.

Karel
  • 21
  • 4
    It would sound more natural (to me at least) to say, “It is said that John is to leave for good.” – Nick Kennedy Sep 27 '20 at 08:17
  • 1
    Absolutely, I can't believe that didn't come to mind. Thanks. – Karel Sep 27 '20 at 14:50
  • I initially upvoted this answer, but on rereading the question I see that it doesn't answer the question asked. OP already knows how to phrase the sentence with "It is said," i.e. "It is said that John (will | is to) leave for good." OP is looking for a way to phrase it in the form "John is said to _____." I guess your equivalent would be "John is said to be to leave for good," but that's pretty awful-sounding. – Quuxplusone Sep 28 '20 at 14:15
0

There is such a thing as a future infinitive in English, if you define the term as an infinitive describing a future situation relative to the time of the matrix situation. Therefore, you can call them future infinitives.

(1) John is/was asked to leave tomorrow.
(2) John was asked a week ago to leave yesterday.

The boldfaced infinitivals in (1) and (2) describe a future situation and a past situation, respectively. But both do describe a future situation relative to the time of the matrix situation.

(3) John is/was said to be a spy (*tomorrow).

In (3), however, the boldfaced infinitival cannot describe a future situation relative to the time of the matrix situation, hence the unacceptability of tomorrow. Here, unlike (1) and (2), the infinitival can only describe a situation simultaneous with the matrix situation.

JK2
  • 6,553
0

Is there such a thing as a future infinitive in English?

No. That is because there is no future tense in English.

See How many tenses are there in English?

So while English has plenty of ways to refer to future actions, in terms of base verbal morphology there are only two tenses in English: present and past. JSBձոգչ answered Nov 13, 2012 at 18:54

It seems that long ago our forefathers realised that the future is unknown and decided that it would be better to express a present idea of what the future - based upon experience, knowledge and intuition - might possibly hold rather than be consistently seen as a failing prophet. The future has no existence.

"I will buy a beer" expresses a current, i.e. present, intention to buy a beer.

"I shall buy a beer" expresses a current determination to buy a beer.

"I am going to buy a beer" expresses a current decision to buy a beer.

"In an hour's time, I will have bought a beer" expresses a current, i.e. present, belief that buying a beer will happen.

"In an hour's time, I shall have bought a beer" expresses a current determination to have succeeded in buying a beer.

All of them are defeated when the speaker is told that there is no beer available.

"The glass will break if you drop it" and "The glass is going to break if you drop it" both express a presently held belief in a future outcome that is defeated when the person with the glass holds it over a pillow.

Additional, as has been said, the infinitive does not express a time frame:

When Hamlet said "To be or not to be? That is the question" He was addressing a general philosophical consideration that is applicable to past, present, and future, or a merely theoretical world.

The infinitive is closely related to a noun in its function and nouns have no tense:

To jump would be a mistake. Jumping would be a mistake A jump would be a mistake.

Greybeard
  • 41,737
  • People hate being told English doesn't have a future tense, no matter how you tell them and no matter the context or type of forum. – hippietrail May 23 '23 at 08:11
  • @hippietrail I think Greybeard and you are erroneously conflating the issues of 'tense' and 'time'. Just because English doesn't have a future tense, which it doesn't, doesn't mean it cannot describe a future situation with a finite verb phrase (e.g., John hopes he will leave tomorrow.) or a non-finite verb phrase (e.g., John hopes to leave tomorrow.). – JK2 May 24 '23 at 03:48
  • 2
    @JK2 We're the two trying to clarify the difference. Everybody else conflates them, which is why everybody always gets confused in conversations like this one. English has a casual and a technical sense of "tense" which become more and more incompatible the more technical the discussion gets. And questions of usage tend toward grammar and then to linguistics. Even in the middle ground this results in a mess but once we get to the linguistics end tense only has one meaning. Discussions need to pay attention to this to stay clear. – hippietrail May 24 '23 at 03:53
  • @hippietrail One thing is clear: OP doesn't ask about the 'future tense', so I don't understand what's the fuss about English not having a future tense. – JK2 May 24 '23 at 04:02
  • Yes OP doesn't use 'future tense' but does use technical grammar/linguistics terminology. But it's true that grammar terminology is not as clear cut as linguistics terminology and using 'future infinitive' doesn't necessarily imply a form of future tense but just a best-effort attempt to use grammar jargon. – hippietrail May 24 '23 at 04:08
  • @hippietrail OP's simply asking if to-infinitive can describe a future situation. OP notes that we can't say John is said to leave for good to mean "It is said that John will leave for good". In that sentence, we can't. But there are cases where to-infinitive can describe a future situation as in John hopes to leave tomorrow. So, regardless of whether OP's term 'future infinitive' is as clear as you want it to be, there is such a thing as a 'future infinitive'. – JK2 May 24 '23 at 04:43
  • I think it's also both fair and valid to interpret OP's question literally: "is there such a thing as a future infinitive" which is what Greybeard does. – hippietrail May 24 '23 at 04:55
  • @hippietrail Greybeard argues that there is no future tense in English, which is totally irrelevant, considering what OP's asking. Greybeard's discussion of infinitives is not even correct. For example, in I am going to buy a beer, the "current decision" is not expressed by to buy a beer but by I am going. Also, in The glass is going to break if you drop it, to break doesn't express the "presently held belief" but simply a future possibility. Moreover, the question To be or not to be is about whether the speaker should continue with his life or end it in the future. – JK2 May 24 '23 at 06:29
  • I also take issue with some points in Greybeard's reasoning but not with interpreting OP as asking if there's a variant of English's future tense which is a future infinitive. That's a fair reading of it which doesn't require malice. When I introspect I mostly use the simple or present continuous when talking about the future. Anyway Greybeard's main point is needed if you follow along the lines of reasoning and explanation throughout the answers and comments on this thread. If OP had asked something like a "future infinitive" I might rule out that reading. Perfect answer would address both. – hippietrail May 24 '23 at 07:30