Search results for 'tag:Dates tag:Past tenses' matching tags 'Dates' and 'Past tenses'

Re: Is " was purchased " past perfect tense?

Tanit — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 07:32:45 GMT

Hi,

loveCZ
Until the new software was purchased, the staff had struggled to keep the accounts records up to date.

In the above example, "was purchased" this possible ~~past perfect tense~~ is followed by "had struggled" this past perfect tense. My teacher taught me that we use past perfect tense to state something which happened firstly and past tense to something that happened after. So I thought the last example should have used "is purchased" this ~~past tense~~ instead of "was purchased" this ~~past perfect,~~ am I right?

First thing first, let's give the verb forms their correct names.

        was purchased >> past simple, passive
        had struggled >> past perfect
        is purchased >> present simple, passive

The time sequence in your example sentence is something like this:
1. in the past, the staff had struggled to keep the accounts record up to date
2. so (in a less remote past) the firm (or company, or whatever) purchased a new software
3. as a result, the staff does not struggle any more.

So, the tenses are fine: the struggling (which is in past perfect: 'had struggled') happened before the purchasing (which is in simple past: 'was purchased') of the software. This agrees with your teacher's explanation, right?

Is " was purchased " past perfect tense?

loveCZ — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 07:15:47 GMT

I really wondered about it...

In my text book, there are examples about how to use past perfect tense. Like :

I had eaten the cake before I went to sleep.

He has done his work and went to play computer games.

And then today when I was reading my book, I saw an example is like :

Until the new software was purchased, the staff had struggled to keep the accounts records up to date.

In the above example, "was purchased" this possible past perfect tense is followed by "had struggled" this past perfect tense. My teacher taught me that we use past perfect tense to state something which happened firstly and past tense to something that happened after. So I thought the last example should have used "is purchased" this past tense instead of "was purchased" this past perfect, am I right?

Re: I want understand something in this sentence

Fandorin — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:06:46 GMT

Because Bill can't "have". He can only "has". Sorr for sarcasm.

And the exactly date indicates only Past Tense.

Re: tense checking

Grammar Geek — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:10:20 GMT

I should have edited the post - they are clearly related, but the first three seemed unrelated to each other.

I broke them into each line so I could comment one by one.

I think the probable date I noted for his visit is one month from the day of writing

You wrote, "If I sleep one more day, I will be meeting my nephew who will be visiting us from the Phillipines." That sounds like he is coming tomorrow to me. How could I guess that it's actually another month away? You wrote that he's coming home "for a month vacation." It sounds like he's coming tomorrow, and staying for one month.

and I think I also have noted that the probable period of completion will last two months.What made you think the writing gives out an idea that I will try to finish the project in one day?

You said that he comes tomorrow, and you are starting today - so naturally that sounds like you'll do one month's worth of work in one day.

You changed the tense of the last sentence to present perfect; (semicolon OK?) but I don't think a past is wrong but a present tense is better because the choice made is current and currently related.

Yes, you made the decision quite recently. The present tense is appropriate. If you used the past, the entire thing should be written in a past tense, not the present.

Where did you want to use the semi-colon?

Re: Tenses

Doll — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:54:33 GMT

My try:

Uses of phrase "found out":
(the city is going to raise taxes and the action of raising taxes hasn't iniitated.)
1) I found out that the city is going to/will/is planning to raise taxes.
I don't see much difference with this:
I found out that the city ~~would~~ will raise taxes. The choice of tenses here depends on the meaning you want to give us. If you mean that there is a more planning in this situation, "going to or planning to " can be used. But I prefer "will" with find out because "will" means something more immeadiate or something decided or learned at the time of speaking.

(It's news that my friend is going to get married and he hasn't married.)
2) I found out my friend is going to/will/is planning to get married.
I don't see much difference with this:
I found out my friend ~~would~~ will get married. Hmm, here you know that he is going to get married. You have an initial informationa bout this so planning to or going to will be more proper.

Use of word "said":
3) My friend said that the city will/ is going to raise taxes.
I see a difference with this and the sentence below seems to be OKbut not as good as the above sentence Why? Is that because raising taxes is still in a planning stage and has not been instituted?
My friend said that the city would raise taxes. I would say that this sentence is wrong. "said that, found out that" is a past tense in form but their meanings is relarted with present events so you shouldn't use a past tense if you are talking about a present event. The difference between will and going to is simply can be explanied as I told you before. If you want a detailed information, search them in the search box above. You will find threads discussing it.
4) My friend said the city will/is going to raise taxes after July 7th.
My friend said that the city would be raising taxes after the date of July 7th.?? -- how would you rewrite this with shifting-back the tense when a future date is involved.

Hmm, it is simple. Changing the tenses will help you. My friend said that the city was going to/would raise taxes after July 7th. (Reported speech) You report the news to your friend so there is nothing wrong with tense change.

Re: Felt like...

Avangi — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:42:54 GMT

Hi Mad, With this scant context, it could be taken either way. It's pretty confusing.

"Friends" is plural. Was she paired with one particular guy?

Whom is she talking to? Her date??

"Felt" is past tense, but "is" is present tense. Is she still on the date with this guy (or guys) (or girls) when she makes this statement? (like maybe at the very end of it?)

Is Neil her main squeeze? (Sorry, my eyes are getting bad.) Is Nell her main squeeze? Who the h--- is Nell? (Is Lana a guy?)

Anyway, I'm assuming "tonight" is a noun rather than an adverb. "I had to explain about tonight." Not, "Tonight, I felt like I had to explain to Nell."

It's still "tonight" when she makes the statement. It sounds like Nell is not present. If she has already explained to Nell, she must have covered a lot of ground.

But on the other hand, we don't know what it is she wants to explain. Did she feel she had to explain what happened tonight, or did she feel (in the past) that she had to explain that she was planning to go on a date without him/her??

If she's talking to the guy and they're still on the date, maybe it's, "I felt like I had to explain to Nell, but, you know what? I don't feel that way any longer." Maybe she's just telling him that she feels wierd about having felt obligated to tell Nell all her private business.

Or maybe she's warning "him" that this "date" is no secret from Nell, because she felt obligated to tell her/him.

You're asking me, "Did Lana explain to Nell about tonight?" I'll tell you. I don't know.

Re: I thought a spider is/was an insect

Grammar Geek — Thu, 08 May 2008 18:25:07 GMT

If you'll note the time of post, Jim and I posted a minute apart, clearly writing our posts at the same time.

I thought *only* simple present is (oops, should be was) correct, but I thought wrong. I now know that both present tense and past tense are possible

NO! "I thought..." REQUIRES past. Present tense is NOT possible!

It doesn't have to turn out to be false.It can turn out that what you thought came true.

A: You're so smart to have brought your umbrella. Can I share it?
B: Of course you can. Even though the forecast didn't call for it, I thought it might rain. I'm sure glad I brought it!

A: Why didn't you want to date me in high school?
B: Back when we were in high school, I thought you were a jerk. Now I KNOW you are a jerk. Go away.

You avoid the confusion by always using the past after "I thought," (unless it's an internal dialogue as Jim suggests above, which is NOT part of typical narrative writing).

Re: Reported Speech

miriam — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:36:47 GMT

Hello. Sorry to hear you're feeling uncomfortable with this type of activity. But you're not alone: I would be, too!

The sentences lack context, which makes it difficult to tell when tense changes are necessary and when they are not (among other things).

There is one sentence that is wrong without a doubt: # 7. The sentence in direct speech uses the present continuous, and the reporting verb (added) is in the past tense, so it really makes no sense to use a construction with "will" to report that statement. You should either keep the same tense (present continuous) or change to past continuous. Sentence #6 has a similar mistake. The decision, however, is sometimes difficult to make since I have no idea when the original statements were made, when they are/were reported, and, also important, whether what was said still applies at the time of reporting or it doesn't.

The rest of the sentences seem OK in general, except for a few details, such as dates and time references, and person changes. For example, in # 8 you retain "a year ago" instead of changing it to some other expression like "the year before" or "the previous year". Again, though, that would depend on several variables, the moment of reporting among them. Also, in #10 you changed "our customers" to "his customers" (why not "their" customers?).

And you're not consistent with verb changes. In # 1, you shifted from the present perfect to the past perfect. But then, in other sentences, such as # 2, you retained the tense from the sentence in direct speech.

I know this isn't much help, but it will -hopefully- point you in the direction of your mistakes and/or inconsistencies.

When we're taught indirect speech, we're told to remember the "golden rule": change verb tenses. But the truth is that it always depends on the context and the content itself, on the people speaking and the time of speaking.

Give these sentences another try, please, and let's see what happens?

Miriam

Sequence of tenses (#4)

Gori — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:03:11 GMT

Could anybody please help me understand why the following underlined parts are kept as a present tense, not a past tense? In my understanding, if they are followed by the rules of the "sequence of tenses," they should be a past tense, no??

Example 1: It would be unforgivable if this turns out to be true.
Example 2: He told the directors he would sue them if the company takes anti-takeover measures.
Example 3: She said that she would not run if that political party fields its own candidate.

If the above unerlined parts were changed to the past tense, how would they sound?

Re: inclusion vs. separation (present perfect and simple past)

Goodman — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:13:52 GMT

Hoa Thai wrote:

Dear all,

First, I would like to thank you in advance for reading this rather lengthy post of mine. I do need to lay out my thinking and reasoning as wide as I can so you can best help me to untangle my own confusion knot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

After a whole day contemplating on freeing myself from this closet of my mind regarding the choice between grammatical correctness and expressional naturalness, I would like to re-explore the marriage between the simple past tense and present perfect - one more time.

As CalifJim clearly explains in one of his writings, simple past represents time specificity; while present perfect serves time non-specificity (i.e., sometime in the past, including the recent time frame). Obviously, âspecificâ and ânon-specificâ cannot be the same. However, in terms of time, a ânon-specific time setâ does include a âspecific time elementâ (e.g., yesterday afternoon is âspecificâ in the time scale between the moment of big-bang and this very moment).

In addition to that, we all know a ânon-specific recent pastâ does not include a âspecific far pastâ â distinctively, the former is younger than the later.

Therefore, (I think) the distinction between âinclusionâ and âseparationâ must have contributed to the way people express themselves.

Moreover, when âthe lastâ enters a picture â as we often compare âthe last yearâ with âlast yearâ â even though, it symbolizes the last one of any sequence (i.e., non-specific), its nature conveys time-specificity â all are before it and none is after it.

In comparing to âthe lastâ - âthe bestâ or âthe worstâ is quality-based and time-unbiased â none or more are before it and none or more are after it; and they are all inferior. However, the superlative âtheâ does indicate a uniqueness, so when it happens, the time involved is specific!

After the above postulation, I can reason that:

âWhat was the best movie you have ever seen?â means âAmong all movies you have seen, which one was the best?â - and that must be logical and natural since âall movies you have seenâ covers the time you saw the first one to the time you saw the last one (time non-specific) and âthe bestâ associates with one point in time (time specific). Time inclusion is in play. (Note that: âWhat is the movie you have seen best?â makes little sense).

Now comes the expression that raised different opinions in the earlier thread (Post: 441847 ):

âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â â If we think it means âWhat was the movie that you have seen last?â, then we are trapped in a time conflict because âyou have seen lastâ combines time non-specific present perfect âhave seenâ and time specific âlastâ to support the same object, the movie.

Question #1: Can we interpret âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â to mean âAmong all movies you have seen, which one was the last?â If not, would âWhat was the last movie you have ever seen?â (âeverâ is added) allow us to carry out the similar interpretation?

If we allow the interpretation of â Among â¦you have ...., which one was the â¦â, then we can conclude that simple past and present perfect can comingle provided that we look at the sentence from the âtime inclusionâ point of view.

Now letâs move on to the next angle of this marriage dealing with the name of great grandmothers (GGMs).

If a GGM passed away far back in the past, should we ask âWhat is her name?â or âWhat was her name?. Some say, âName is name - dead or alive!â thus, âWhat is her name?â is fine. However, some might disagree - âName is not mortal; it is buried with the dead!â (side note: in some part of the world, the dead is given a new name since people would not dare to call out the old one disrespectfully); thus, they would go with âWhat was her name?â

For the first set of people, they would prefer this question: âWhat is the name of the last GGM you have lived with?â For the second set of people, âwasâ should replace âisâ.

Question #2: If âwasâ is the better choice, do we face the same problem like that of âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â

Letâs compare âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â and âWhat was the name of the last GGM you have lived with?â Structurally, the two sentences are very similar, except that âhave livedâ comes with preposition âwithâ. (I think) that difference must have allowed us to easily accept the second one. Intuitively, we must have associated âhave livedâ with the GGM and âwasâ with the name.

In other words, if what I think is acceptable, then the âobject separationâ gives the sentence its naturalness and logical weight. Meanwhile, it seems odd to us to associate âhave seenâ with the movie and not with its title! The âobject uni-identificationâ causes us to question. (Side note: sometimes, we have seen a movie and remembered the actors and its story but its title). The difference between âtime inclusionâ or âtime separationâ in fact enters into our mind as a byproduct but not the cause for our confusion. Take a look at this question: "What is the title of the last movie you have played with?" Can you tell any difference between that one and "What is the name of the last GGM you have lived with?"

Finally, for those of us who believe the addition of the word ârecentlyâ would provide the âtime separationâ between ârecentlyâ (present perfect) and âwasâ (simple past) in order to resolve the seemingly faulty logic, (I think) it would not make any difference. In short, if we can convey âWhat was the movie you have seen recently called?â to mean âTell me about the movie you have seen recently â What was it called?â, then it should be acceptable â the movie becomes a whole, and the title is a part.

Thatâs it! Thank you all for trying to understand what has been going on in my mind. I am anxiously looking forward to your comments since I hope that your generosity will help me advance to a new gate on my learning journey.

Best Regards.
Hoa Thai

Hi Hoa Thai,

Let me be the brave one in the attempt to tackle this long thread, if no one already posts a reply by the time I am done with writing You obviously have a high degree of the English language and I can comfortably say most will agree. But you seem to have been bothered by what had been said in the previous posts about the mixed usage of simple past and present perfect. The problem to me really has more to do with one's logic and persepctive, rather than his grammatical knowledge, and you seems to be stuck at the sentence which you posted 2 days ago. "What was the last movie you have seen?â can not be a viably grammatical sentence no matter how we dress it. The rules I learned told me that simple past and present perfect just can't be married and expected to sound happily together. Consider this sentence "when was the last time you have talked to your ex-husband?". Do you agree or not agree that this is not a sound sentence? If you say "I haven't talked my your ex-husband after the devorce but I e-mailed him", then the conjunction [but] will validate the use of mixed tenses. But they can not exist in the same frame of sentence sturcture.

Your questions:

Question #1: Can we interpret âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â to mean âAmong all movies you have seen, which one was the last?â I don't think so, "what" usually requires a defined answer and "among" offers alternatives in my opinion. If not, would âWhat was the last movie you have ever seen?â (âeverâ is added) allow us to carry out the similar interpretation? "Ever" in this context does not sound right. "Last" is an adjective, but not a comparative adjective as in "What was / is the most scary/ borning/ bloody movie [that] you have ever seen?" Because we are associating movies by their names which do not change even as time passed, we can use either past or present [was/ is] to refer to the movies with resepct to the rest of the context in present perfect.

By the same token, we often hear people say soemthing like: "what was the lady's name we have just met?" which is fine either with [was / is] becasue "was" paints a picture of the time she was introduced to you, and "is" paints a picture of her face with her name in general.

Other than that, I really don't know how to break it down further.

And regarding â recentlyââ¦

Itâs not a proprietary word to mean present perfect, if there is any hint / notion that this is the case, itâs not true.

"I recently took a business trip to Washington DC". Simple past with no defined time. âRecentlyâ here defined it only as short time ago.âOk