|   
			ESL Forum: 
			
			
			
			Techniques and methods 
			in Language Teaching 
			
			Games, activities 
			and teaching ideas 
			
			Grammar and 
			Linguistics 
			
			
			Teaching material 
			
			
			Concerning 
			worksheets 
			
			
			Concerning 
			powerpoints 
			
			
			Concerning online 
			exercises 
			
			
			Make suggestions, 
			report errors 
			
			
			Ask for help 
			
			
			
			Message board 
			  
			
			
			
			
			 | 
 		
		
		ESL forum >
		
		
		Ask for help > Help needed     
			
		 Help needed 
		
			| 
				
					| 
					
					
 
 Lenonka
 
   | 
						
							| Help needed 
 |  
							| Could you help me to explain why in the case of the first sentence there is an inversion between  �you � and  �have �, but in the second sentence there is none? It seems natural to me, but I failed at explaining it to some of my beginning students.   1. How many times have you been in love? 2. What �s the most beautiful country you have ever been to?   Thanks a lot and have a nice day. |  8 Oct 2009      
					
					 |  |  
			| 
 
					
					
					
				 
 |  
			| 
				
					| 
					
					
 
 anitarobi
 
   | 
						
							| Because the first one is a direct question, and the second one is sort of an indirect question. In the 2nd example, the direct-question part is actually What �s the most beautiful country, and the part you have ever been to is actually a relative clause (the longer version would also be that/which you have ever been to). Only the direct question part has the inversion! |  8 Oct 2009     
					
                     |  |  
			| 
				
					| 
					
					
 
 lovinglondon
 
   | 
						
							| I explain my students that they must have as many inversions verb-subject as question marks they have. So you can �t have two inversions in the same question. In the first one you �ve got "have"+"subject-you". In the 2nd one you �ve got "is"+"subject-the most beautiful country".....the rest of the sentence muctn �t have an inversion. Take Care
 
 |  8 Oct 2009     
					
                     |  |  
			|  |  
			| 
				
					| 
					
					
 
 abaza
 
   | 
						
							| Dear colleague   Have in the first question serves as an auxialary that is a must after what and as a part of the whole meaneing of have been. It is a double edged weapon. The second part inversion happened in the first part of the question so there is no need to make other invertions in the second partor it will be grammatically fatal.               Thanks keep on   |  8 Oct 2009     
					
                     |  |  
	
	   |