If it's simple past, you don't need to use "have" in front of the simple past tense. "I shouldn't ate it." "I shouldn't have eaten it." is correct.

I shouldn't have ate it. Or I shouldn't have eaten it. What's the difference? The second sentence is present perfect so is the first sentence simple past tense?

No. To build the simple past tense of a verb in a negative sentence, you use did + not + base form of the verb So, your sentence is correct this way: - I did not want him to come.

I would like someone to confirm my thoughts on the following sentence, to see if I am on the right track or am just in fantasy lala land, going off on a tangent: "Because Malcolm had never become a cutthroat CEO, he had few enemies." I

I just want to point out the word "could" is indicative of the subjunctive mood Modal verbs don't have tenses and moods in the way that other verbs do. could certainly acts like a past subjunctive in If I could help you, I would.

1. There is no objection to the use of time words with the past perfect tense. The objection is when these words are used with the present perfect tense. You may, however, if you wish, replace "last week" with "the previous

This article is very helpful for the past simple pronunciation - Rules for Past Simple Pronunciation

You have not heard both used by native speakers– you have mis-heard– and we have already discussed this at length. This very simple grammar point is the one for which I mistakenly awarded you an A+ for understanding. I now withdraw the grade and

Hi, vineeta. Welcome to English forums. Thanks for joining us. Actually, "What" is the subject of these sentences. In this case it's a pronoun, third person singular. "You" is the direct object of the verb. It's like,

Is the use of the word pled in the following example grammatically correct? The parties have pled not guilty .. In this case the simple past tense and the past participle are identical. (You can always find them listed in your dictionary.)