請問為什麼to decorate用在英文上是錯的呢？

You are dealing with a causative verb (使役動詞). For causative verb, here is the general rule:

Causative verb:
(have, make, let, get, keep...) someone + (to) V (active voice)
Think of this way, you "order" someone to do something, someone have to do it ON THEIR OWN.


(have, make, let, get, keep...) something + P.P. (passive voice)
You WANT something done, that "something" can only be DONE BY someone.

This is a general rule, however, recently, my long suspicion has been confirmed by master LionEnglish and Louis. Please refer to this question:

http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=1512101206637

Causative verb "get and have" if they follow with someone, then you can use V-ing.

In your questioned sentence, "have" follows with SOMETHING (trees), you need to use P.P. (decorated), because trees are DECORATED by people, not by itself.




2012-10-16 09:40:00 補充：
Master LionEnglish, I don't know why master rhody treated "have" as a linking verb. To me, a linking verb is like BE-verb.

2012-10-16 09:40:16 補充：
Therefore, whether a verb is a linking verb, all we need to do is replace that verb with BE-verb, if the meaning of the sentence doesn't change dramatically, then it is a linking verb.

2012-10-16 09:41:22 補充：
In this question, if we replace have with "be", then the meaning changes so much. It means, "have" in this sentence is NOT a linking verb.

2012-10-16 09:44:47 補充：
now, take the following sentences as examples:

It tastes awful. (tastes is a linking verb)
He tastes the cake (tastes is not a linking verb)

2012-10-16 09:51:33 補充：
master LionEnglish, I think people use grammar rule to an unreasonable point. To me, I would use a little bit of grammar, but use my own logical thinking to reason myself why there is such a grammar rule.

2012-10-16 09:53:20 補充：
Maybe, people think with grammar and vocabulary memorized, their English will be good, because they can score well in English tests. Sigh!, I guess I cannot comment on this, after all, I was once a victim of this.

2012-10-16 10:01:31 補充：
typo!

...need to do is replace ... ==> need to do is to replace

2012-10-16 22:11:15 補充：
master Louis! your explanation, "have" is NO LONGER a causative verb. As a causative verb, "have" means "make, order" (使, 讓). However, in your explanation, "have" is just a regular verb, it means "possess, obtain" (有,取得). Therefore, you need to use "to V".

2012-10-16 22:12:59 補充：
It really has nothing to do with article "a" or "the".

Some verbs (such as linking verb, explained in opinion) can have different function in the sentence. Depending upon its function, it can be used in a different way.

2012-10-16 22:16:13 補充：
If you don't treat it as a causative verb, then yes your explanation is another way to look at the question. Exactly what this sentence means can only be guessed. After all, it ONLY has ONE sentence, it doesn't have other sentence to know the full context.

2012-10-16 22:17:55 補充：
Having a question like this can ONLY cause debate. After all, with different English ability and understanding, such a sentence can be interpreted in different ways.

2012-10-16 22:19:57 補充：
Especially, when we deal with verbs like causative and linking verbs, due to their multi functions. At a certain situation, it can be explained or understood differently.

2012-10-16 22:21:38 補充：
This is WHY for English beginners, you shall NOT rely on grammar too heavily. It can only restrict your English learning. A good example is like this question. Both master Louis and I have very different way to look at it. Who is right ?

2012-10-16 22:23:46 補充：
The answer is BOTH ARE RIGHT. We just look at and explain the verb "have" differently. This is the problem when you rely on grammar rule. After all, grammar rule is dead and stiff.

2012-10-16 22:26:21 補充：
If the grammar talk about "causative", then it only has causative rule. However, in this question, causative is NOT the only way to look at. Therefore, we just stick with out own opinion due to grammar rule. It can really restrict the possible meaning of this question.

2012-10-16 22:28:23 補充：
For English learning, in my opinion, it is a disaster, it can cause unnecessary debate, because you don't see it the other way.

2012-10-16 22:30:54 補充：
I remember, master Allen has ever answered a question:

http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=1512033007846

2012-10-16 22:32:04 補充：
To most people, "look forward to" needs to follow with V-ing. However, master Allen has pointed out, NOT REALLY, it depends how you use it. It is another proof that grammar can ONLY be used as a refer, not a bible for using a language.

2012-10-16 22:32:48 補充：
typo!

... as a refer ... ==> ... as a reference ...

2012-10-16 23:50:38 補充：
typo! opinion #016

...stick with out own... ==> stick with OUR own ...

Wow! a lot of good discussions indeed. I would say "decorated" is better fit semantically - tree decoration is a routine for X'mas. "have a tree to decorate" makes it too much like an objective.

2012-10-18 08:39:37 補充：
I personally never said "let's buy/have a tree to decorate"

I have 6 gigantic X'mas trees in the backyard, want one?

1.使役動詞後接名詞決定其後用主、被動，若是動作由此名詞發起則用原形或現在分詞，反之，動作由此名詞被動接受則用過去分詞，顯然本句樹是被裝飾，試比較下面例句：
Christmas is around the corner! Let's have a Christmas tree decorated .
I saw a girl crossing the street.

2.Christmas is around the corner! Let's have a Christmas tree to be decorated .

用不定詞需先確定其邏輯主詞在決定用主、被動，本句to be decorated 其邏輯主詞是 tree ，所以用被動


3.Let's have something to eat.=Let's get something to eat.其中have當拿意思，與本句使役動詞用法不同。其實80%以上動詞均兼具及物與不及物用法，端視在句意的區分----------

文法我不太懂，不過單單就此題冠詞所引起的邏輯爭議來看，我認為即使Christmas tree前面用了a這個不定冠詞(意思是any one)，表示聖誕樹是沒有特定對象的，但在這種情形下要聽這句話的人去執行這個指令，還是符合邏輯的。

因為在實務上，老闆(或下達命令的人)在乎的可能只是「我們大廳裡只要有『一棵』裝飾好的聖誕樹」，就OK了。當員工(或接受命令者)接到這個指令時，可以去買「任何一棵」(any one) 聖誕樹來裝飾，這樣就算執行好老闆所下達的指令了！怎麼會不合邏輯？

2012-10-17 02:03:38 補充：
也就是說，以下兩句話都可能是對的：

(1) Let's have a Christmas tree decorated.
讓我們來裝飾棵聖誕樹吧。(重點是裝飾)

(2) Let's have a Christmas tree to decorate.
讓我們弄株聖誕樹來裝飾它。(重點是「弄株聖誕樹」)

但如果我要表達的是(2)的中文意思，我想動詞我應該會用get而不是have。
Let’s get a Christmas tree to decorate.

2012-10-17 04:26:32 補充：
Strillian:

(1) Let’s have a Christmas tree decorated. (讓我們來裝飾棵聖誕樹吧) 並不是
(3) Let's have a Christmas tree (which was) decorated. (「讓我們去弄來一棵已經裝飾好的聖誕來吧」或「讓我們已經裝飾好一棵聖誕樹」的意思哦！

這裡的have是當成使役動詞，有「命令」、「指使」的意思，接PP(過去分詞)係因為表示「被動」，而不是表示「已經」。就好像I will have my car repaired.這句話裡面，並沒有表示我的車子「已經」被修好了的意思。

2012-10-17 04:26:51 補充：
若要表達(3)「讓我們弄來一棵已經裝飾好的聖誕樹吧」，英文應該是：
Let’s have a decorated Christmas tree.

Let's have a Christmas tree to decorate.
讓我們弄株聖誕樹來裝飾它。（任何一株都可以）

因為Christmas tree前面用了a這個不定冠詞，意思是any one。這樣的話聖誕樹是沒有特定對象的，如何要聽這句話的人去達執行指令？不符邏輯。

只有Let's have the Christmas tree decorated.：讓我們找人把這株聖誕樹裝飾好。（指定必須是這一株）

Let's have something to eat.＝讓我們弄點東西來吃。
something也是不確定的代名詞。

相同的這個問題我回答過別人的提問。但該位提問者還是認為應將have視為使役動詞，後面應用過去分詞當受詞補語，但have不必然為使役動詞，還是要看上下文的關係來決定。

2012-10-17 08:50:11 補充：
Let us have ...裡的let是使役動詞，所以have使用無to的不定詞。

2012-10-17 09:09:51 補充：
前句是Christmas is around the corner.聖誕節近了。
如果我們家沒有聖誕樹，則Let's have a Christmas tree to decorate.讓我們弄株聖誕樹來裝飾它。

如果我們家己有聖誕樹了，則Let's have somebody decorate the Christmas tree.或Let's have the Christmas tree decorated.意思都是派人來做這件事。
如果只是自己要做，則會說成Let's decorate the Christmas tree.

2012-10-17 09:15:43 補充：
Let's have a Christmas tree decorated. = Let us have somebody decorate a Christmas tree. = 讓我們找人來裝飾一株聖誕樹吧！（顯然不是我們自己來裝飾它，而且我們家也還沒有聖誕樹）

看來用了decorated和不定冠詞a也是正確的。我沒有想到這點，應該收回我原來的堅持。

我想Lion大師在暗示版主及各位: decorated並不是最佳選項.
大家再努力想想吧. 癥結就是在冠詞上.

DSG,

Could you go check out this so called best answer, and give us some thought, please?

http://tw.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=1512101503469#ooa_hash

2012-10-16 09:36:03 補充：
Tsao,

別改題目嘛！ 把 a 改成 the 就沒戲看了。 就是因為題目是 a 才有 C, D 解答之爭嘛。 版主也是看了先前那題才提出這個續集的呀，改題目就不好玩了！

2012-10-16 09:51:42 補充：
Thank you, dear friend, for your prompt sharing. I second your opinion.

此have 是使役動詞
主動：have + O + V
被動: have + O + p.p.
讓我們把聖誕樹裝飾起來，聖誕樹是要被裝飾的，所以用被動式
Let's have the Christmas tree decorated.

它不像感官動詞(see/ watch/ look at/ hear / listen to / feel / notice/ observe...)+ O +V-ing 可以用來表示O主動進行的動做。