He has had three heart attacks since 1978, lost one kidney..

< Previous | Next >

Karen123456

Senior Member
Malaysia English
The following is from a local newspaper.

Subhas Anandan has to be hooked up to a dialysis machine thrice a week, for four times each time. He is no stranger to illnesses. He has had three heart attacks since 1978, lost one kidney to cancer in 2001, suffered diabetes and blocked intestines, no thanks to excessive drinking and smoking.

It appears to me that 'lost one kidney, suffered diabetes and blocked intestines' does not fit 'has had', but I don't know how to rephrase it. Is my observation correct? If so, could you please rephrase it?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
  • Yes, the logic and grammar are odd. "Had" fits the heart attacks and blocked intestines, but not the kidney item.

    He's had heart attacks, a cancerous kidney (which was removed), diabetes, and blocked intestines--all due to his habits.**

    Other than this, one has to create a different verb for each issue, as was attempted, poorly, in the original sentence.

    **ADDED: Let me say that the logic is not perfect since events, conditions, and physical items are intermixed. But at least they are all referred to by nouns, making the grammar passable if not entirely dealing with the logic issue.
     
    Last edited:

    Myridon

    Senior Member
    English - US
    Yes, the logic and grammar are odd. "Had" fits the heart attacks and blocked intestines, but not the other item.
    I read it as "has had A :tick:, (has) lost B :tick:, (has) suffered C :tick:, (has) D :confused:.
    "Has" is a past-perfect helping verb three times and suddenly switches to present tense meaning "possesses."
     
    Last edited:

    Antoine Meyer

    Senior Member
    English - Canada
    The sentence does not state "he has had lost..."; rather, "had" and "lost" are separate verbs: he has had three heart attacks since 1978 and he has lost one kidney. "Blocked" is also a separate verb; it is not as though there is an implication that before "blocked," some word (other than "has") has been deliberately omitted for ellipsis. Therefore, there is no need to rephrase the sentence.
     

    Hildy1

    Senior Member
    English - US and Canada
    I agree with Myridon that "blocked' is an adjective modifying "intestines".

    He has
    a) had three heart attacks,
    b) lost one kidney, and
    c) suffered diabetes and blocked intestines.
     
    Hi Hildy,
    May I take it that you agree that the logic of such a sentence leaves something to be desired. It's best, in my opinion,
    to list a) affected organs, OR b) diseases, etc.


    I agree with Myridon that "blocked' is an adjective modifying "intestines".

    He has
    a) had three heart attacks,
    b) lost one kidney, and
    c) suffered diabetes and blocked intestines.
     

    Parla

    Member Emeritus
    English - US
    One of the problems is that one of the items (diabetes) is chronic and the rest are episodic, so you can't put them all in the same tense. (The diabetes is in the past only if he is dead.)

    He has had three heart attacks; has lost one kidney to cancer and now undergoes dialysis three times a week; has experienced an intestinal blockage; and suffers from diabetes.
     

    Hildy1

    Senior Member
    English - US and Canada
    Hi Hildy,
    May I take it that you agree that the logic of such a sentence leaves something to be desired. It's best, in my opinion,
    to list a) affected organs, OR b) diseases, etc.
    I agree that what you recommend would make a very well-constructed sentence. However, the sentence as it is does (just barely) have parallel structure, with a series of three past participles to complete the auxiliary "has".
     

    RM1(SS)

    Senior Member
    English - US (Midwest)
    It needs an and inserted before suffered, though, as Hildy did in post 6. "He has had... , lost ... , and suffered...."
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top