In Simple past^x, Clauses^x

MrPedantic wrote:Even though the form of the past subjunctive is the same as the form of the simple past, you can distinguish the two by their function: 1. He went to London. 2. If he went to London, he would...Are we not talking about grammatical categories? These verb forms are exactly the...

FRANKLY SPEAKING wrote: Loans to be repaid over a period of one to four years are short -term loans. I think we could have said : Loans which are repaid over ... .right ? could you explain the usage of the infinitive in the sentence above ? Thanks in advance Hi Frankly, Loans to be...

Earlier today, I had posted a message concerning the very same issue. I had not been fortunate to have found this message thread beforehand. (Uh oh, here I am getting tangled up in verb tenses with the preceding sentence. I mixed pluperfect with present perfect. Groan.) So, are you saying that...

CalifJim wrote:Can we use unless in main clausesAs soon as you add unless it becomes a subordinate clause. There are therefore no clauses with unless which are main clauses.Anyway, I did not understand the BBC's idea of the usage of unless. Not one of their examples showed an incorrect...

CalifJim wrote:Mostly I read these clauses as follows: If I cared (now or generally or in the future) If I had cared (then, at that time, and I didn't) I would study (now or generally or in the future) I would have studied (then, at that time, and I didn't) Nevertheless, there is a...

She hasn't come to visit us since her wedding (on July 7th) > OK She hasn't come to visit us since she got married > OK "Since" introduces either a complement referring to a precise moment in the past, or a time clause referring to a precise moment in the past (simple past). In those...

The 'short' answers are as follows. 'd taken to mean had is an older interpretation. Over time, people have come to think of it as would. The modern interpretation of 'd in that expression is now would. As for the tenses. Case 1: The clause after rather explicitly contains a subject...

CalifJim wrote:In actual practice, the use of the past perfect quite frequently violates the mathematically precise timelines set out for it in grammar books! It is merely an indicator that something happened in the context of something past. Now the problem is that this past point of view...

In actual practice, the use of the past perfect quite frequently violates the mathematically precise timelines set out for it in grammar books! It is merely an indicator that something happened in the context of something past. Now the problem is that this past point of view has to be...

What do you think about patterns with both clauses in simple past? They are among the most useful, I think, and they sound quite natural. See previous post. No. had already is common in that context, but just already is also fine in American English. Personally, I would have chosen had...