Why is this sentence correct if you can't have "would" for repeated action in the past with a state verb?

Question

"Our grandmother would always have a little surprise waiting for us when we visited."

I know that "have" can be an action verb, such as *I am having lunch.", but in this meaning above, we can't say, for example "I am having a surprise for you."
   So if "have" is a state verb in my above example, how can we use "would", knowing that a sentence like "I would have short hair when I was younger." is incorrect since "have" is also a state verb in that sentence?

? · Accepted Answer

Because "have" is not a state verb in that sentence. The grandmother doesn't just possess a snack- she prepares it and gives it to the grandchild. There are many usages of "have" in English.

? · Answer

"Have" is not a state verb. It is a transitive verb. She had a surprise.

I've never heard of your rule that you can't use "would" for repeated action in the past with a state verb. "Grandma would always be in the kitchen when we arrived." I don't think anyone would object to that sentence other than the person who made up that "rule" for no reason.

ignoramus · Answer

I do not know what you mean by a "state verb".  A verb is a verb, whatever its function in the sentence.

Your example "I am having a surprise for you." is meaningless.  Likewise "I would have short hair when I was younger." is rubbish.  "I HAD short hair when I was younger" is the correct and ONLY form.  Your division of verbs into "action" or "state" form is nonsense.

Land-shark · Answer

It is correct. 'would have' also implies that she made a special effort to make sure there was a nice surprise ready.

? · Answer

It is correct but if you don't like it, you could correctly say, "Our grandmother always had a little surprise waiting for us when we visited" since it conveys the the same thing in the past tense

Why is this sentence correct if you can't have "would" for repeated action in the past with a state verb?

5 Answers