guzhao67  +  580723 Mon, 27 Oct 08 03:25 PM Hello, everyone: I don't understand the following paragraph, cited from a grammar book, could you help me please? "there is an idiomatic exception to the rule that the simple past tense indicates definite meaning: this is the construction with "always" illustrated by "I always said he would end up in jail; Timothy always was a man of peace". it is simply a colloquial variant of the present perfect with 'state verbs', and can always be replaced by the equivalent present perfect form. there are equivalent question and negative forms with "ever" and "never": "Did you ever see such a mess? I never met such an important person before." what's the point here? And what would be the equivalent present perfect form of "I always said he would end up in jail; Timothy always was a man of peace"? thank you. guzhao67 Joined on Mon, Oct 20 2008 New Member 41 Grammar, Verbs, Constructions, Tenses, Negatives, Simple Past, Present Perfect, Past Tenses, Paragraphs

	Fandorin  suggested by buckmajor  +  580802 Mon, 27 Oct 08 08:14 PM Hi there. Welcome to EF. guzhao67 “ Hello, everyone: I don't understand the following paragraph, cited from a grammar book, could you help me please? "there is an idiomatic exception to the rule that the simple past tense indicates definite meaning: this is the construction with "always" illustrated by "I always said he would end up in jail; Timothy always was a man of peace". it is simply a colloquial variant of the present perfect with 'state verbs', and can always be replaced by the equivalent present perfect form. there are equivalent question and negative forms with "ever" and "never": "Did you ever see such a mess? I never met such an important person before." what's the point here? And what would be the equivalent present perfect form of "I always said he would end up in jail; (he's in jail now) I've always said he ends up in jail. (I keep on repeating this because it's likely for him to be jailed and I'm sure of that) Timothy always was a man of peace"? (Now he isn't. He might be die change his mind) thank you. ” The differense between them happens to be interchangeable in some informal way or in narratives. We use Past Simple along with Present Perfect when we're talking about events happened in the past, but Present Perfect points that event may occur in the present again. He has written three novels (He perhaps will write another one) He wrote three novels. (He won't write, because he is gone). If the situation has changed we use Past Simple. I have owned three restaraunts. ( I own now ) I owned three restaraunts now (Now I don't, because I've sold them). Sometimes in papers and news we can see Past Simple is used along with Perfect Tense without changing the gist. The event is introduced by Present Perfect and another background is described by Past Simple. The famous artist John Cramp has died of cancer. He was 50 and had two children. (the children are alive) Fandorin Joined on Thu, Dec 20 2007 Moscow Contributing Member 1,382 Whatever happens, be yourself. Constructions, Tenses, Negatives, Present Tenses, Simple Past, Present Perfect, Past Tenses, Past Simple, Paragraphs, Arts, Speaking, Chat, Friendships, Simple Tenses, Negations

	Mister Micawber  +  935214 Fri, 09 Oct 09 02:52 PM Sorry, I don't have time to read through this whole discussion, but 'I have owned 3 restaurants' indicates distinctly that he no longer does so:  if he still owned them, he would say 'I own 3 restaurants'.  The present perfect merely relates the past situation to the present in some way:  perhaps, for instance, the listener has said that the speaker has a lot of knowledge– or no knowledge whatsoever!– of the food service industry. Mister Micawber Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004 Yokohama Veteran Member 30,780 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.' Tenses, Present Tenses, Simple Past, Present Perfect, Past Tenses, Restaurants, Simple Tenses, Apologies