http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aPast+PerfectSearch results for 'tag:Past Perfect' matching tag 'Past Perfect'en-USXMOD (Build: 3616.28671)http://www.englishforums.com/English/HaveWentVsHaveGone/2/dqggj/Post.htm#997425Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:21:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:997425cliveHi, *I HAVE GONE is " Present Past Perfect Tense" 'I had gone' is Past Perfect. Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseAndPastPerfect/lpmxp/post.htm#996171Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:08:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996171califjimExample: I learned more today than I did all week. (OR) I learned more today than I had all week. Are both sentences correct? Since 'learned' is past tense, would it be accurate to use 'had' because it is past perfect? The sentence suggests that today is the last in a series of seven days. That means there is no separation in time between the progression of the days of the week and the current day. But had implies a separation -- a going back to a time previous to the span of time on which the sentence focuses. The two contradict. I find had a bit anomalous for this reason. A more appropriate use of had , in my opinion, is the following, where there is a clearer separation in time: I learned more today than I had...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseAndPastPerfect/lpmxp/post.htm#996160Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:55:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:996160yankeeHi Anon Although "had" is possible, I think I'd prefer "did". I don't think anyone would interpret a real difference in terms of meaning. By the way, you could also use "have" (rather than "did" or "had") if you were viewing "today" as being finished, but the week were not yet over.http://www.englishforums.com/English/CouldYouCheckThisForMe/lpkbg/post.htm#995992Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:27:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:995992mister micawberIt is always (?) possible; past perfect is a stylistic tool-- it makes good writing.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ItHadntBeenALie/lpkxz/post.htmSun, 22 Nov 2009 04:04:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:995559akdom"Forgive me, but I've--I've got an appointment." A smile curved across her mouth. It hadn't been a lie , not in the strick sense of the word. Could you explain why use "hadn't been a lie" here? Why the Past Perfect ? it hadn't been a lie (PastPerfect) it wasn't a lie (Simple Past) I would rather use It wasn't a lie . I am very confused. Please explain to me that the different sense it conveys when Past Perfect is used and when Simple Past is used.http://www.englishforums.com/English/TheInversionQuestionsQuestionWord-Questions/lkxxv/post.htm#972387Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:33:27 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:972387cool breezeDo/does/did is not used in questions 1. with forms of to be : Is he happy? Were they swimming? 2. with perfect and past perfect auxiliaries : Have you seen him? Had it already begun? 3. sometimes with have/has/had when the verb is in the presnt tense, in other words, the finite verb: Have you money? This usage seems to be slowly disappearing and is seldom used these days, especially in AmE. It's far more common to say: Have you got money? / Do you have money? If have does not mean "to possess", do/does/did must always be used: Did you have your house painted? Why does he have to go there? 4. If an interrogative pronoun is the subject or a part of the subject of a clause, do/does/did is not used: What...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/2/lkcjp/Post.htm#970002Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:52:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:970002dimsumexpressSorry to butt in like this. I'm sure Clive will give his expert advice but let me try to explain it the way I see it (from a non native speaker's point of view). Regarding the New York sentence, since both the living/working occur at the same time I see no reason for using the past perfect in combination with the simple past as the two suggest different times. I had never seen such a beautiful beach before I went to Kauai. The past perfect is needed here regardless of the time word 'before' . It has to do with 'the PP have never seen' put in the past (up until some point in the past as opposed to up until now) . I did not have any money because I had lost my wallet. Tony knew...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Thought/lkgxd/post.htm#969896Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:17:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969896pleasehelpWhat about 3 days ago? Should I use past perfect or present perfect?http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/2/lkcjp/Post.htm#969557Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:43:18 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969557cliveHi, Really, I don't feel I have anything I want to add at this point, and I don't want to get repetitive. My advice is that you digest things a bit and let them settle in your mind. At the same time, every time you use Past Perfect, ask yourself if it seems really necessary. After a while, start a new thread with anything that still bothers you. Best wishes, Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/2/lkcjp/Post.htm#969500Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:53:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969500ivanhrSorry to butt in like this. I'm sure Clive will give his expert advice but let me try to explain it the way I see it (from a non native speaker's point of view). Regarding the New York sentence, since both the living/working occur at the same time I see no reason for using the past perfect in combination with the simple past as the two suggest different times. I had never seen such a beautiful beach before I went to Kauai. The past perfect is needed here regardless of the time word 'before' . It has to do with 'the PP have never seen' put in the past (up until some point in the past as opposed to up until now) . I did not have any money because I had lost my wallet. Tony knew Istanbul...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/2/lkcjp/Post.htm#969333Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:56:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969333dimsumexpressThank you Clive for the critique. For the New York sentence, is there anything wrong or misleading in the construction that needs to be reworded. After the rewording, the original past perfect context has been erased. Maybe I tried too hard to concoct a past perfect sentence. The past perfect here makes it sound like they counted him out before he lost his campaign, which is not your meaning. I'd say Many people counted him out 20 years ago after he lost his campaign . . . I agree "after" is a better choice than "when" for the context. But I also have this thought. When all the ballots were completely counted late into the evening, that's when he realized he had lost...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IfClause/lkvgz/post.htmThu, 12 Nov 2009 03:47:03 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969124natalia paramitaPlease help me how to use 'if' clause.. how if the clause is in present or past tense, or in present or past perfect tense.. Many thanks for ur kind help :)http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/2/lkcjp/Post.htm#969060Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:20:22 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:969060cliveHi, The couple next door had argued and gotten physical frequently months prior to the last night's shooting. Sounds fine either way to me. He had worked for a couple of restaurants in town as a waiter before he became a big time singer. I wouldn't say this is wrong, but I prefer simple past. I lived in New York for 5 years while I had worked for IBM between years 1900 to 1995. I'd reword this whole thing. I lived in New York from 19 9 0 to 1995, while I was working for IBM.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968941Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:22:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968941dimsumexpressHi Clive, Thanks for taking the time on my query. I guess what I had in mind when I used "had taken computer science for 2 semesters.." rather than the simple "took" was the deliberate intent to emphasize the duration I had spent time in the course before deciding to change major in the second year. I know simple past would work in everyday conversation. But I didn't expect the contrary when I opted the past perfect. Now I have few more past perfect scenarios for you to comment on. Please let me know if past perfect is an overkill, being incorrect or unnecessay. Thanks, The couple next door had argued and gotten physical frequently months prior to the last night's shooting. He...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968897Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:27:52 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968897cliveHi, Please allow me to clarify my own question. I've learned that if we have 2 events which took place in the past, the long preceding event should be described in past perfect. I don't feel that the lengthof the earleir event is a major factor. i.e. I had taken computer science for two semesters before I decided to change major during my second year of college . Can you comment on this? is the past perfect considered incorrect, No, not at all. But do you fimd the ssequence of events unclear if I say ''I took computer science . . . '? or overkilled in your opinion? One mean's overkill is amnother man's emphasis. It's the wrier's choice. It appears to me that whether a...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968758Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:46:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968758califjimWe lived in Ireland for five years We (live) __ in Ireland for five years then we (move) __ to London in 2000. I think the answer is "lived/ moved" not "had lived / moved" Am I right.Thanks for your consideration. You're right because the story is being told in the same order it occurred. If you mentioned the move first, however, you would have something like this: We moved to London in 2000. (We had lived in Ireland for five years.) It would not be: We moved to London in 2000. We lived in Ireland for five years. That makes it seem that you moved to London first, then lived in Ireland, but that's not what you want to say. People expect you to tell the events of your story in the same order they...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968730Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:09:38 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968730dimsumexpressIn an attempt to reconfirm my own understanding, I've found this: http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html The Past Perfect expresses the idea that something occurred before another action in the past. It can also show that something happened before a specific time in the past. Examples: I had never seen such a beautiful beach before I went to Kauai. I did not have any money because I had lost my wallet. Tony knew Istanbul so well because he had visited the city several times. Had Susan ever studied Thai before she moved to Thailand? She only understood the movie because she had read the book. Kristine had never been to an opera before last night. We were not able to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968716Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:40:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968716dimsumexpressHi Clive, Thanks for your comments. Please allow me to clarify my own question. I've learned that if we have 2 events which took place in the past, the long preceding event should be described in past perfect. i.e. I had taken computer science for two semesters before I decided to change major during my second year of college . Can you comment on this? is the past perfect considered incorrect, or overkilled in your opinion? It appears to me that whether a sentence should take past perfect is rather loosely open to the interpretation of the readers. Is this a raw statement?http://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968703Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:24:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968703cliveHi, However, words like 'before' and 'after' usually make the sequence of events very clear. In such cases, simple past is commonly used rather than past perfect. eg She turned on the stove before she cooked dinner. instead of She had turned on the stove before she cooked dinner. There are also some other general considerations for use of past perfect such as the writer's possible desire to keep the focus on the later event. Best wishes, Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/WeLivedIrelandFiveYears/lkcjp/post.htm#968652Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:38:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968652dimsumexpressThe key indicator for using past perfect is this question: Do I have two events involved in the scenarios you are describing? Clearly, that's the case here. We (live) __ in Ireland for five years then we (move ) __ to London in 2000. Improved: We had lived in Ireland for five years before we moved to London in 2000.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThePastPerfectTenseCorrect/lkrqm/post.htm#968187Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:55:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:968187dimsumexpressHe had received our help over past years Based on the above, I would say past perfect continuous is more appropriate as this process went on for quite sometime. However, it didn't meet the basic requirement for past perfect which is two events taking place in the past with one preceding the other.http://www.englishforums.com/English/SentenceCorrection/ljxhl/post.htm#967134Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:36:15 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:967134avangiI'd recommend the past perfect tense, "that I had dozed a little." This shows that one past tense event took place before the other. First, you dozed. Then you realized it.http://www.englishforums.com/English/UsePastParticipleFormItself-SupposedlySentencePastPerfect-Te/ljkqm/post.htm#966158Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:18:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:966158ivanhrHi, A sentence containing only a past perfect verb suggests an earlier time in the past. In the above example it could be over a hundred years but I think a broader context would probably answer that question. "The Rockerafella fortune had begun over a hundred years earlier with Nelson's grandfather , John D Rockafella, the founder of the Standard Oil Corporation." I guess it implicitly suggests an earlier time, (there was Nelson and there had been his grandfather before him).http://www.englishforums.com/English/UsePastParticipleFormItself-SupposedlySentencePastPerfect-Te/ljkqm/post.htmMon, 09 Nov 2009 12:45:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:966122mkyolThe following is a line from a documentary film: "The Rockerafella fortune had begun over a hundred years earlier with Nelson's grandfather, John D Rockafella, the founder of the Standard Oil Corporation." I'm confused about the use of "had" there. The source of my confusion stems from the fact that sentence is not in the usual past perfect tense with both form and form present -- it just has the latter. I was thinking that maybe the lines that come before it or after it provide a time reference point for the "had." The previous lines before it are not directly relevant to this sentence as the sentence changes the topic, so I don't think they have anything to do with it as far as my question...http://www.englishforums.com/English/UsingPastPerfectLastYear/ljjpb/post.htm#965818Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:36:17 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965818tinanam0102Hi Clive, Thank you for your help. I'll remeber to use Simple Past. I apologize for the typos I made in #1. For #2. I copied it down from a newsletter. Regards, Tinanamhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/UsingPastPerfectLastYear/ljjpb/post.htm#965808Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:22:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965808cliveHi, In both of your examples, I see no reason to use Past Perfect. I'd just use Simple Past. If you have typed them correctly, other parts of the wording suggest to me that these sentences were not written by native speakers. Best wishes, Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/UsingPastPerfectLastYear/ljjpb/post.htmMon, 09 Nov 2009 05:15:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965805tinanam0102Hi teachers, Could you please tell me why past perfect is used with "last year" instead of past tense? My tutorial teacher used to tell me it was wrong about the choice of tense. "Germany's biggest solar company, Q-Cells, had traded near 100 euro early lat year;, it's now about 10 euro." "Do you remember John? He had written a paper on God's creation. He now is travelling to China." Thank you. Regards, Tinanamhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/DoubtsInParticiple/ljjmb/post.htm#965764Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:15:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:965764cliveHi, I have doubt in a sentence. "I have reviewed the attachment which u had sent" Can you please let me if the grammar usage in this sentence is correct. I'm puzzled. You care about tenses, but not about spelling the word 'you' correctly. I see no reason here to use Past Perfect. "I have reviewed the attachment which you sent" "I have reviewed your attachment." Best wishes, Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ItHadIntendedItIntended/ljvlp/post.htm#964374Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:41:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:964374yankeeHi Tinanam0102 You asked about the word "it", but you also underlined "it" twice, and "it" refers to different things in each case. Here is my opinion: "it had intended" it = the (Spanish) government The past perfect was used because the intention referred to is connected to the establishment of subsidies, and that preceded the actual growth as well as the subsequent cutting/capping of subsidies. (The Spanish government had new/different intentions when it cut the subsidies.) "it" (the second one) It would have been easier to say what "it" refers to if you had included the rest of the sentence, but I guess that "it" probably refers to subsidies or the growth...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IsThisSentenceCorrect/ljdwk/post.htm#963993Sat, 07 Nov 2009 05:07:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:963993cliveHi, Yes. But you need a context in which it makes sense to use the Past Perfect. Best wishes, Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/IfItWereNotFor/lwzcm/post.htm#959542Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:48:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:959542califjimdoesn’t have to be ““If it had not been for” have to is such a strong expression! No. Actually, it doesn't absolutely have to be If it had not been for . The substitute clause If it weren't for is often used instead, even though it's not technically correct according to the grammar books. This may have something to do with the fact that the verb is to be . The substitution of the past for the past perfect after if seems to be fairly frequent with this verb. If he were smart, he wouldn't have borrowed so much money. If we were in charge, we could have prevented them from making such fools of themselves. If you were in a better mood, you wouldn't have screamed at the children like that. To be on the safe side,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/BecauseMalcolmNeverBecomeCutthroat-Enemies/lwbmj/post.htm#958759Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:05:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958759mkyolThanks for the post, the sentence was in fact from a documentary video on Malcolm Forbes. I think I get what you mean correctly, but let me just elaborate on my thinking process so I am not on a wrong track (correct any part that you notice is wrong): So it's a narrative, with the narrator "going" from the beginning time at which the story or biography begins to the end time at which Malcolm's life comes to an end as the video progresses. By "going", what I mean is that when the narrator talks about Malcolm and events surrounding him, he is essentially at a specific point of time in the past (with respect to now as in the present-reality now) -- determined by the content just before the narrator makes the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/BecauseMalcolmNeverBecomeCutthroat-Enemies/lwbmj/post.htmSun, 01 Nov 2009 02:22:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958537mkyolI 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 am pondering about the above sentence, in terms of the tense used. I think the sentence is trying to convey that sometime in the past, Malcolm had few enemies, and this is because going further back into the past from that point, Malcolm was never a cutthroat CEO (he never became one during that time). Compare the above sentence with the following sentence, written in simple past tense: "Because Malcolm never became a cutthroat CEO, he had few enemies." In this case, I think that...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AQuestionAboutWishNeverBorn/lwbkj/post.htmSun, 01 Nov 2009 01:25:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:958503mkyolHello, I'm confused about the sentence "I wish you had never been born." I don't quite get why the "had" is used.. is that making the sentence have past perfect tense? Or does it have something to do with conditionals? Couldn't you just say "I wish you were never born"?How are the two sentences different in meaning? Thanks.http://www.englishforums.com/English/QuestionsMainlyPastPerfectTense-Uses/lhgvg/post.htm#954941Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:24:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:954941califjim1. 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 week". Both are equally correct from the grammatical point of view. 2. The sentence is fine as it stands. The simple past forms of find and leave are indistinguishable from their past participles, so it's impossible to say whether the writer intended the auxiliary had to apply to them or not. Nothing about the correctness of the sentence hinges on knowing this; it would be correct either way. 3. would be is not wrong. It depends on what meaning you want to convey. Because he hadn't...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Hadnt/lhcxg/post.htmMon, 26 Oct 2009 22:24:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:953944pleasehelpWhy didn't you just say you haven't read the book. Why didn't you just say you hadn't read the book. Again one is present perfect and the other is past perfect but what's the difference between the two sentences?http://www.englishforums.com/English/AboutInversion/lhcbb/post.htm#953749Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:47:56 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:953749califjimThere is no true inversion involved (as in forming a question), although you may consider some of the movements of constituents to be inversions. _______________ First, let's disambiguate the pronouns that refer to the council. He said that the council had recently had it confirmed that the council had the power (to investigate). The basic sentence is: The fact that the council had the power was confirmed. (This is simply the passive form of (Somebody) confirmed (the fact) that the council had the power. ) This can be stated more simply as: That the council had the power was confirmed. Inserting "dummy it " and post-posing the clausal subject, we get: It was confirmed that the council had the power . ...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ChpTickets/lhrvj/post.htmMon, 26 Oct 2009 05:35:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:953199pleasehelpI told my mom she has gotten a ticket for not speaking English. OR I told my mom she had gotten a ticket for not speaking English. What's the difference between the two sentences? I know one is present perfect and the other past perfect but don't they essentially mean the same thing?http://www.englishforums.com/English/RepeatedHappeningSaidDone-Times/lgmbk/post.htm#951763Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:04:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:951763avangiHello. re•peated adj. happening , said or done many times. Oxford Dictionary. I can't understand why it is said happening and not happened (like said and done ). Good question. This is a very restricted definition "adj. " When we make adjectives out of verbs (eg., "to repeat") we typically use the past and present participles: This is a repeated pattern. This is a repeating pattern. Then we get into the business of the pattern to be plus adjective vs. passive voice verb. This is repeated many times. This is said many times. This is done many times. This is happened many times. This is happening many times. The definition is rendered in the present tense. You may...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThePastPerfectPastIndefinite/lggrk/post.htm#950063Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:20:09 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:950063norwolfThe contexts: honeysuckle submerged there on the floor of Dale Creek. Yes, he said, he saw my mother sitting on the steps stirring a cake, and I was seven and licking vanilla icing. # " Oh, Teddy, I can hardly wait. When can we go there? I want Patrice to come too. What steps do we take? The steps on East Boulevard or the steps on Herrick Road? " # " We take the steps that lead from the Czechoslovakian gardens. " # I was so happy. When I was young I had wandered through Dale Creek on summer days. Then one day they built a highway over it. # Each day I passed Lakeview Cemetery where my father and brother were buried. # A magazine called Avenues came out with an article, " Welcome Home, Suzanne...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThePastPerfectPastIndefinite/lggrk/post.htmThu, 22 Oct 2009 16:33:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949953norwolfThese sentences are taken from COCA: When I was young I had wandered through Dale Creek on summer days. They'd laughed at my name when I was young , and I had n't liked it much. He had evidenced traces of it when he was young ; But I once learnt we better use the past indefinite instead of the past perfect. Is that true? Could you share your views, teachers? Thank you very much.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThePastPerfectPastIndefinite/lgzdz/post.htmThu, 22 Oct 2009 09:35:18 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949710norwolfThese sentences are taken from COCA: When I was young I had wandered through Dale Creek on summer days. They'd laughed at my name when I was young , and I had n't liked it much. He had evidenced traces of it when he was young ; But I once learnt we better use the past perfect. Is that true? Could you share your views, teachers? Thank you very much.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastPerfectTense/lgvcj/post.htm#949469Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:33:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949469avangiThe tense is a tool. You choose the option when you wish to clarify the time relationship between two (or more) actions or events. We'd really need to see more to judge fairly if the past perfect is useful in this particular case.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastPerfectTense/lgvcj/post.htm#949434Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:50:30 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949434jemaasjrYou make me laugh. (In a good way.) With out seeing the rest of the writing I have a hard time to be sure, but that sentence as written reads really weird. Past tense would shurely be enough here.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastPerfectTense/lgvcj/post.htmThu, 22 Oct 2009 01:15:25 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:949408anonymousI'm writing a college essay in which the sentence "After graduating from (college), he had taken the business world by storm." The context it is used in is within a eulogy. My question is whether the past perfect tense can be used because the addition of "before he died" is implied in the sentence, or should had taken simply be changed to took?http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldHaveVppOrWouldV/jjkcv/post.htm#948646Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:29:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:948646anonymousHere's how it should be: Jackson would have celebrated his fiftieth birthday this August if he were alive . Jackson would have celebrated his fiftieth birthday this August if he had not died earlier this year . There are a few different ways. The protasis (if part) is in present time and contrary to fact whereas the apodasis (then part) is in the past. It all depends when this was written, too. It could read this since it was written in June: Jackson would celebrate his fiftieth birthday this August if he were still alive . Jackson would celebrate his fiftieth birthday this August if he had not died . Jackson would be celebrating his fiftieth birthday this August if he had not died . Jackson...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThePerfectFormSubjunctive-Mood/wmbjg/post.htm#948634Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:01:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:948634anonymousIt can be put in present perfect and past perfect using "if" like this: If the train have already left , we shall/will take the next train. (formal present perfect subjunctive) If the train had already left , we should/would take the next train. (formal past perfect subjunctive) You can substitute the modal "should" between "train" and "have" to read like this: If the train should have already left , we shall/will take the next train. Should the train have already left , we shall/will take the next train. If you conjugate "to have" in the present indicative as "the train has", this is considered an informal condition or it means something...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Grammar/lzhnv/post.htm#945834Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:44:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:945834cool breezeNow if I look up "are," the dictionary tells me that it is the present plural of "be." But what I would expect is that it would tell me that it is the present plural of "am" or "is" because those are the verbs I actually use if I want the singular of "are." MM has given you agood answer; I'll just elaborate a little. It is obvious that you have never been taught the forms of to be and how to use them. (It's never too late to start! ) Are can be singular or plural, by the way. A. the full/complete infinitive: I want to be here. Used after many verbs such as want, expect, desire etc. Also used after adjectives and there are other uses. B. the plain/bare infinitive =...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Grammar/lzhnv/post.htm#945721Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:02:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:945721jemaasjrSomething I want to know, is way they use "to be" as the lexeme when the first persion singular "is" seems more obvious, at least to me. The tenses I was obliged to learn in school were future perfect, future, present, past and past perfect.http://www.englishforums.com/English/FeltHimConvicted/lzhqq/post.htm#945618Sun, 18 Oct 2009 03:04:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:945618anonymousThe problem you are having is that the felt goes with she and the convicted goes with her son , and so you can not say She felt convicted by the media... As a result you have to put her son into a subordinate something (clause, whatever) to keep the to verbs separate. Also, the way you have it written is an elliptical construction, which is perfectly acceptable, but I think it confused you in verb usage. What you want to say is: She felt (that) her son was convicted by the media... The that subordinates her son was convicted , and you need the was because it needs to be past perfect tense. (Also, saying grammatically and semantically is being redundant, at least as I understand the terms. Perhaps you have been taught something else?) ...