didn't/hadn't /in a taxi

I suppose someone could make some kind of obscure argument that "hadn't" is correct, and "didn't" is not. Personally, i wouldn't buy it. "They had to get there by taxi, did they not?"="They had to get there by taxi, didn't they?" Either hadn't or didn't is acceptable.

In a taxi is fine, one might also use by taxi. "They had to get there by taxi, didn't they?" (By the way, i'd be more likely to use "didn't" than "hadn't" in that sentence.)

I don't think that hadn't they would see much use in this particular instance, MsTan. 'had to' is the simple past of 'have to'. The full question would be,

Did they have to get there in a taxi/by taxi?

The mini question/tag question would be,

They had to get there in a taxi/by taxi, didn't they?


If you use a past perfect, say 'had gotten', then "hadn't they" would be the norm.

They had gotten there in a taxi/by taxi, hadn't they/had they not?

they did it in a taxi

the taxi had/was the Hardy-Ramanujan number

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_number

Helpful replies? Hardly.

The verb is had, so the question part has to be "hadn't they?"

Simples.

Is it really, McTag? 'had'

*They had get there in a taxi, didn't/hadn't they?* [* denotes ungrammatical]

Isn't it the periphrastic modal 'have to'?

My goodness, you might be right. I believe you are.

These are deep waters.

I was reading "had" and was careless not to notice "had to"

"It's no go the Yogi man,
It's no go Blavatsky.
All we want is a bank balance
And a bit of skirt in a taxi.

Louis MacNeiece

They are indeed, Sire.