Search results for 'tag:Simple past tag:Articles' matching tags 'Simple past' and 'Articles'

Re: earlier in the evening

Avangi — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:32:32 GMT

Aha! This one is a little difficult. Absent earlier context setting the present time, "earlier in the evening" does two things. It establishes that the present time is this evening. And it establishes that Chavez picked the thing up at some time earlier this evening.

Well, I guess that's a dumb way to explain it.

Since "her eyes went" is simple past, the evening we're talking about is in the simple past also. Two things happened on that fateful evening: (first) he picked up the hold-all (second) her eyes went to it.

The main clause is in simple past, so the relative clause describing the earlier event is in past perfect.

So I should have said, it establishes that the [reference time] is that evening. And it establishes that Chavez picked the thing up at some time earlier that same evening.

You may well ask how we know that both events happened on the same [simple past] evening, since the sentence doesn't say so. We just have to assume it, since there's no other information.

There's also the fact that the speaker chooses to use the definite article, "the evening," and there's simply no other evening for "the" to refer to.

I"m thinking of a Jim Webb song, The Paper Chase: And later in the day she'll be searching for a way/ To let you know she's ready for your little game to end. Here again, the important thing is the use of the definite article, "later in the day." It will always mean "that same day," which may or may not have already been mentioned. Not the day before!

Sorry to go on and on. - A.

Re: Please suggest!

Yankee — Sun, 11 May 2008 02:05:33 GMT

Just to summarize:

had arrested = past perfect form of the verb 'arrest'

had to = simple past form of 'have to'

Although it is more common to say 'the police', the word 'police' is also sometime used without the definite article ('the') -- especially in news reports.

Techical Report Writing

Kaos — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:09:34 GMT

Hi,

Awhile ago, I asked whether one should use simple past for describing observation of an experiment that has already been carried out. Many adviced using simple past. I recently read an article and I found the author (she is an American) mixed both. Here is an excerpt from her article:

Article
The first Fast Retransmit in Figure 4 results from three
dup acks for packet 25. The second Fast Retransmit results
from three dup acks for packet 42, the last packet transmitted
before the first Fast Retransmit was initiated.
Because the x-axis shows the time that packets appeared
on a link within the network, the sequence of events at the
sender has to be inferred from the graph. After the first Fast
Retransmit, when the sender's congestion control window
reaches four, the sender transmits packets 29-32. The sender
receives an ACK for packet 29, and transmits packets 33 and
34. Next the sender receives an ACK for packet 30, and
retransmits packets 35 and 36. Finally, the sender receives
two dup acks for packets 42 (as responses to packets 31 and
32). At this point the congestion window is 6, and the sender
transmits packets 43-48.

She was discussing about an observation which was plotted on a graph (not shown). At first, she used simple past (in the first paragraph), and then in the second paragraph, she started to elaborate in simple present. Is this correct and why? I am confused now.

active\passive

Newguest — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 12:57:59 GMT

Active sentence: Somebody stole my bicycle.

Passive sentence: My bicycle has been stolen.

Is the passive sentence OK, in your opinion? I would write: My bicycle was (simple past) stolen.

As far as I know if the active sentence is written in simple past than the passive one should also be written in simple past?

One more question. I never know whether I should write it with the definite article or not: present simple, simple present, present simple tense etc. Should I put the "the" before each of them or always omit it?

thanks

Re: several grammar questions (2)

Avangi — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:45:23 GMT

Hela wrote:

Dear teachers,

1) How would you qualify this time of genitive, please? Which "title" would you give it? Is it some sort of "human activities"? but I don't really like this.

love's spirit, science's influence, my life's aim, duty's call . wow! I remember genitive as a Latin case 60 years ago. What do you mean by "time"? Your examples are all possessive. Joe's dog= the dog of Joe. Love's spirit=the spirit of love.   What am I missing?

2) Which tenses would you use in the following sentences and why?

a) Weather conditions have improved/improved (?) during the the last few days. Present perfect means the action has been [recently] completed. Simple past would mean it happened at some time in the past. The use of "during" means it was a continuing process. "Last few days" means it continued up to the present, at which time it was completed.(Present Perfect)

- Is it possible to say "the weather conditions" or is it definitely wrong? yes

- can we say "during the last days" = without "few"? yes, but it sometimes means the last days of the universe.

b)There has been / was (?) a real fall (?) in that town's population over/during (?) the last decade.Same tense situation as example 2.  Something happened over an extended period which just ended. "Over" and "during" both work, in my humble opinion.

c)He ~~should~~ showed/assured ??? him that he doesn't have the time / time (?) to pick up the children from/at (?) school. I say both choices are acceptable in both your red group and your black group.

Woops! where did the colors go?

- Would you please tell me if the article here is obligatory and why? Why not? the time=the time required / time=any time   Both work.

- which preposition should be used? are both possible? ANSWERED

3) âDid you do both maths exercises? The first was easier than the second.â âThat's right, the first was the easier of the two.â

- Is the "M" of math capitalized ? + should we say "math" or "maths" (with âsâ = Br. Eng ; without Â« s Â» = Am. Eng ?) Math would be capitalized if you said, "I just signed up for Math." I doubt "maths" would be used in this context in either domain, but I could be wrong.

- Would you please tell me when one should use âbothâ and âthe twoâ? Is it wrong to say âdid you do the two maths exercises...â and âthe first was the easier of bothâ ? Both choices work in the first example but only "the two" works in the second.

4) My mother left on her holiday/vacation (correct?)/ went on holiday(~~s?)~~/vacation a few weeks ago.

5) I have to pick her up at/from (?) the airport on her return / when she arrives (correct?).I think these are all okay. "From" would be questioned by some.

Many thanks,   Man, I needa break!

Hela

Re: question on newspaper article with past perfect

Mkyol — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:59:08 GMT

If I may trouble you once more, is it acceptable to use just the simple past? (it seems there is little ambiguity that would result)

question on newspaper article with past perfect

Mkyol — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 07:42:31 GMT

The following is from a newspaper article:

"Hill told reporters in December, after visiting North Korea, that he had not seen a draft of the declaration but that U.S. and North Korean negotiators had had extensive talks about what the U.S. expects to see in the list of nuclear programs."

I'm wondering about the past perfect form.. seems to me it may be correct to just use simple past, like below:

"Hill told reporters in December, after visiting North Korea, that he didn't see a draft of the declaration but that U.S. and North Korean negotiators had extensive talks about what the U.S. expects to see in the list of nuclear programs.

Is the reason because of 'told', to indicate that Hill told reporters after the events?

Re: past tense or past perfect tense?

Magic79 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:08:56 GMT

What do you think of this sentence, which I have read in the Arab News Newspaper of Wednesday 28 Nov.

The sentence is as follows:

"Iran yesterday announced that it has built a new missile with a range sufficient to put Israel and US bases in the Middle East within easy reach..."

Source: Agence France Presse

Dont you think that we shoud use the PAST PERFECT with has built instead of the present perfect?

I believe that verbs such as, said, announced, told, reported, etc. are followed by past perfect when used in the simple past. That's why I am suspicious of the sentence above qouted from the Arab News Newspaper which had taken the article from the French news.

Re: I want to find some friend to talk and improve my english

Quangtrungvtv — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 03:09:23 GMT

Yesterday, I was joint in a interview in s-fone corp. It is difficult to pass this exam because it very hard.

This exam include two parts : IQ part and English part. In IQ part , I did quite well , but English part I donât understand any sentence .

I am studying lines-lines Books, intermediate level, fellow I want to write some sentence about this book.

UNIT 1 : MODERN LIFE .

Grammar in use :

1In this unit show past ten, simple present tense .

2. this part talk about a story of effect modern life . This is simple story but it practice use tense of English.

UNIT 2 .FORTUNE

Grammar :

Talking about the past :

Grammar in use :

look at the photographs and headline of the newspaper article .

Question one : where does story take place ?

Answer : story talk about fortune of life . It is talking about Chris Bod , a programmer . After sell his house , with 145,000 $ he had taken plan to Las Vegas . Chris sitting all day in Casino and finally he lost all his money . He comeback London and live in a small flat . sine , He âve given up gambling.

Rules : the articale contain four tenses for talking about the past .

underlines positive and negative examples of each these tense

. The simple past

The past continuous

The past perfect

The present perfect.

How do we form each tense find example regular and irregular verbs.

Re: Always

Yankee — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 02:32:52 GMT

Kooyeen wrote:

That's true in general, but when we have a context and some particles like "never", "always", "already", etc., it seems to me that that distinction is not so clear anymore. For example:
I've already seen that movie / I already saw that movie - In context, they can be used in the same way. This is quite common.
I've never driven a car / I never drove a car - In context, I think they can be used the same way too. There are definitely some contexts where these two would definitely not be interchangeable in AmE.
I've never known how to use it/ I never knew how to use it - I was told these can be used the same way too I think this would be extremely context-dependent. (I still don't know how to use it)

As for "always"...

- I know you don't like Japan and...
- What? I do like Japan! Actually, I('ve) always wanted to go there on vacation... (what's wrong with taking out "have"?)

- Way to go! You are a champion! I always knew you were the best! (what's wrong with simple past here? I think it's even better than the present perfect)Let me throw some questions back at you here, Kooyeen. Why did you use 'were' in this sentence? And do you think 'were' would also be used if the sentence began "I've always known ..."?
- Good post Jim! I('ve) always said your explanations are among the best! (again, anything wrong? Using simple past doesn't imply that I don't think that of your expplanations anymore) Why did you use 'are' in this sentence but 'were' in the last example you gave?

- ~~Whose that car over there?~~ Correction: Whose car is that over there? / Whose car is over there?
- I don't know. It's been parked there for a month, I always saw it there in the same position, nobody never moved it... (simple past, but the car is still there...)This combination of sentences sounds awful to me and the second half doesn't sound natural to me at all. I would expect the end to be 'I always see it there in the same position, nobody ever moves it.'

Hi Kooyeen
I put some comments in the quote (in red).
Some people try to claim that Americans almost never use the present perfect, but that's definitely not true. However, I believe that we Americans do tend to use it less often than our British cousins. Especially in contexts where both the past simple or the present perfect are possible (the action is complete), we're more likely to choose the past simple.