Tense

   Share on Facebook  
Lin1978  #426565  Wed, 03 Oct 07 11:04 AM
Dear masters,

I have some questions on perfective and simple past sentence, especially when "conditional sentence" involved. I would like to know that, from the native speaker's respect, is there any major difference between these sentences? Furthermore, is the meaning I explained right?


1. Amber called you twice while you were out. She might have something important to tell you.

       |<--->|

-----     x    -----  o  ----- 

|<--->|: Amber called you twice
x : while you are out
o: now

The situation is Amber called you in that period which you were out. I am not sure when you were back.

2. Amber has called you twice while you were out. She might have something important to tell you.

        |<----------->|

-----     ***   o  ----- 

|<--->|: Amber called you twice
x : while you are out
o: now

Is this sentence correct? Or should I change the sentence to " Amber has called you twice since you were out."
Perhaps you're just coming back. The situation is that Amber called you in the period which you were out.


3. Amber had called you twice while you were out. She might have something important to tell you.

|<--->|

  -----     x    -----  o  ----- 


|<--->|: Amber had called you twice
x : while you are out
o: now

Does this sentence have logical problem? On account of the time Amber called you, you seem to be there. You weren't leaving yet.

4. Amber has been calling you while you were out. She might have something important to tell you.

        |<***>|

-----     ***   o  ----- 

|<***>|: Amber has been calling you
x : while you are out
o: now

Perhaps you're just coming back. The situation is that Amber kept calling you until now.






Thank you for your patient to read my question.




  
Not Ranked
Joined on Mon, Jan 1 2007
New Member (24)
Mister Micawber  #426615  Wed, 03 Oct 07 02:15 PM

I cannot follow all your arrows and codes and colours, so let me just say this:


1. Amber called you twice while you were out.-- She called at two points in past time during the length of past time that you were out; no indication of when you returned

2. Amber has called you twice while you were out.  -- She called at two point of time in the past during the length of past time that you were out, you have recently returned and the speaker thinks she may call again

3. Amber had called you twice while you were out. -- Bad structure and impossible logic.  Past perfect places its past action earlier in time than another past action-- but here, calling and being out happen at the same time.  No indication of when you returned.

4. Amber has been calling you while you were out.-- As with #2 but no indication of the number of calls; progressive also indicates increased concern/interest on the part of the speaker.


I hope this helps.




  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004
Yokohama
Veteran Member (22,710)
SystemAdministratorTeachers
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'
Lin1978  #426892  Thu, 04 Oct 07 08:05 AM

Thanks for your explanation. I get the whole picture how the sentences are working.

But I still have one small question. Except the sentence #3, the past perfective one, the other three sentences are reasonable and meaningful, aren't they?
  
Mister Micawber  #426918  Thu, 04 Oct 07 09:54 AM

Yes, they are.

  
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL General English Grammar Questions
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service