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

Re: Written english vs spoken english

Avangi — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:56:08 GMT

YSchneider
Many people from US companys often aswer me in the present perfect like:
Thank you, I've received your e-mail OR Yves, I've spoken to my boss and he...or Yves, I've forwarded your mail to our finance department and it will be processed soon!

Am I wrong or would you use simple past at least in spoken english? Like: Thank you, I got you mail(I received your mail) or Yves, I spoke to my boss and he said...

What's your opinion on this?

Hi,
I was surprised by the variety of responses this generated. In cases where the tense difference serves no useful purpose, I've always taken it as a difference in register (probably ill-advised though well-intentioned) and by extension a difference in spoken vs. written, and casual vs. formal.

Even in business correspondence there are huge differences in the degree of formality one encounters (company A vs. company B; A addressing B; A addressing C; A addressing a stranger in company D, etc.). In general, I think Americans with modest educations tend to use the perfect when they feel the need to sound correct. A particular secretary may feel the need to use it in all her business correspondence, so that it becomes part of her style. At the bar she may speak differently.

I can certainly understand why a non-native would raise the question.

- A.

Edit. Sorry, didn't notice the date.

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?

Re: re: the use of present perfect sentence

Huevos — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:42:55 GMT

It's hard to know what you are asking. First, the present perfect is only used with current temporal markers, not dates. Obviously the court made the ruling at some time in the past so you either use the simple past + the date, or just the present perfect.

On the 25th of September 2008 the Court ruled that ***.
The Court has ruled that ***.

Re: Filipinisms/Filipinoisms? Ring a bell?

Mister Micawber — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:07:37 GMT

.
I would consider this exercise damagingly prescriptive; most are neither uniquely Filipino nor wrong. However (and my comments refer to AmE/BrE):

1. Free subscription of... (Free subscription toâ¦) - prepo issue-- AmE/BrE uses the collocation subscribe to.
2. Can I speak withâ¦? (May I speak withâ¦) - To sound more polite/ask permission?-- Both OK. 'Can' is more casual but just as common.
3. Come again? (I'm sorry I didn't get quite get that / Excuse me? / I'm sorry would you please say that again?) - English trainers discourage agents to use this because they say that it could mean 'cum again')-- The English trainers are nuts. Come again is common and casual. Your examples in parentheses are overly formal for most situations.
4. It's for free! (It's free. / It's free of charge. / We're sending it to you for free.) - Filipinos have been used to saying 'It's for free'. How do I say that it should be avoided? What makes it wrong?-- Nothing makes it wrong; it's fine.
5. Hold your line/For awhileâ¦ (Would you mind if I put you on hold for a second? / Please hold) - hold your line is absurd. any comment? what about for awhile?-- I agree that 'Hold your line' is not natural in AmE/BrE. 'Please hold' or 'Could you hold, please' is the usual.
6. Open/ close the light/computer (Turn on/off the light/TV/computer) - how do I explain this? it sounds like opening/closing the tv for repair.- This seems to be a direct translation from Spanish? Tagalog? At least, it is the same error that Japanese make.
7. Do you mind waiting? Yes, I'll wait. (No, not at all. / No, I don't mind at all.) - YES is the issue. wrong response. any other feedback?-- 'Yes' is logically wrong but common when the tag ( e.g. 'I'll wait') is also present; speakers seldom have the opportunity to stop and think about the 'Do you mind?' form, and this includes native AmE/BrE speakers.
8. Anything? (Is there anything I can do for you? / How may I help you?) - fragmented, seems vague?-- Yes, it seems vague and fragmentary out of context.
9. I'll ask her an apology. (I'll apologize to her. / I should make an apology.) - this sounds illogical?-- Not a natural AmE/BrE formation.
10. We take lunch. (We eat lunch. / We have lunch (every Sunday).)-- 'Take' seems to be an occasional replacement in this context in many Englishes. It is not an egregious variation.
11. We accept repairs. (This shop repairs cars/cellphones, etc.)-- Seems fine to me.
12. We accept painting jobs. (This shop does painting jobs.)- Quite common.
13. Tuck out (Untuck)- Odd.
14. He was salvaged. (He was assassinated.)-- A new meaning for the word for me, and it is not in the dictionary. Perhaps some confusion with 'savaged'?
15. She delivered her baby yesterday. (She had her baby yesterday. / Dr. Smith delivered her baby.)-- This is fine. From the dictionary-- 'to give birth to: She delivered twins at 4 a.m. '
16. Xerox (Photocopy)-- Very common in AmE at least. Among my generation, 'to xerox' is perhaps more usual than 'to photocopy'.
17. Oppositor (Opposition member)-- A new word for me. Not a bad formation, but perhaps difficult to understand by foreigners.
18. Hand carry (Carry - on luggage)-- A new word, but reasonable.
19. It's traffic today. (Traffic is heavy.) -- It seems vague and fragmentary
20. Senatoriable (Senatorial candidate) -- Odder than #17
21. At around 2pm (At about 2pm) - around is Am? about is Brit?- Very common in AmE; it also appears with this meaning in the Cambridge dictionary.
22. I failed in Accent training. (I failed accent training.)-- A common expression, though I prefer your alternative.
23. We were under Mr. Johnson. (Mr. Johnson was our teacher.) - Filipinos are used to saying 'That student is under my class' so this filipinism has started.-- In context, 'We were under Mr. Johnson' sounds fine, while 'That student is under my class' does not.
24. My brother is taking up law. (My brother is taking law. / My brother is studying law.) -- 'Take up' is common, but means the overall intention, not just the matriculation.
25. Where are you studying? (Where do you go to school? / What school do you go to?)- 'Where are you studying' is fine.
26. Pass by my office before you go. (Drop by my office before you go.) - Brit/Am phrasal?-- Not AmE, at least. 'Stop by' or 'Drop by'.
27. We have one participant only. (We only have one participant.) - should they say 'only one participant'?-- The 'only' can go in several places; at the end is one of those places.
28. I talked to her already. (I already talked to her.) - I need help on adverb order. This confuses all Filipinos and me too. Where should adverbs be placed?- Adverbs are relatively variable in their placement. In this case, both are all OK. More interesting is that AmE uses simple past more consistently with 'yet' and 'already' than does BrE, which prefers the perfect aspect.
29. Will you be at the office at 7am? Actually. (Will you be at the office at 7am? Yes.)-- Not AmE/BrE
30. Actually, I like Jennifer Aniston. (I like Jennifer Aniston.) - Actually/basically has become Filipinos expressions.-- I wouldn't say that it is unique to Filipinos; many AmE speakers develop the habit in various contexts. Too much is too much, however.
31. As per Paul, all request forms should be signed by him. (As per Paul's instructions, all request forms should be signed by him.)-- This is common bizspeak throughout the English-speaking world.
32. Wanted: Sewer (Wanted: Tailor or seamstress)-- Yes, it is certainly open to misinterpretation! But 'seamstress' is sexist.
33. Take home (Take it home / To go. / For take out)-- 'Take home food' seems like a regional variant of 'take out food'.
34. I felt kind of tired. (I felt rather tired.)-- 'Kind of' is very common in informal AmE.
35. As to the projectâ¦ (About the projectâ¦)-- A common formality in most Englishes.
36. Thank you for that/this one. (Thank you for the information. / Thank you.) - I need to send this in a few minutes and I still couldn't think of an explanation. Phrasing sounds awkward to me. But besides getting straight to the point, why did 'for that/this one' make it wrong?-- 'One' is wrongly used; 'information' is uncountable.
37. I do love playing basketball/volleyball. (I love playing basketball/volleyball.) - this may sound right depending on the flow of the conversation, right? e.g. you don't love playing... No, I do...-- You are correct. This is called the emphatic 'do'.
38. Currently, I live in Quezon City right now. (Currently, I live in Quezon City. / I live in Quezon City.) - redundant - now and currently.- Yes, redundant.
39. Actually, I like Microsoft, Symantec and Adobe (I like Microsoft Symantec and Adobe)-- The comma is necessary if Microsoft and Symantec are different softwares.
40. As per Mon, all request forms should be signed by him. (As per Paul's instructions, all request forms should be signed by him.)-- This is the same as #31, and OK.
41. I do apologize (I apologize.)-- This is fine indeed. It is the same as #37, and is more polite than your bracketed alternative.
.

Re: did not eat / had not eaten

Clive — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:08:27 GMT

Hi,
did not eat is in the simple past which requires a specific date?
so this in this had not eaten (past perfect) referring to the past would be the correct one?
is my explanation correct?
Generally speaking, that's true.

But it's better to think of it this way. The Past Perfect shows that a past event has importance at some later time in the past.
eg When I saw the man last Tuesday, he was hungry because he had not eaten for two weeks. I gave him some food immediately.

If you search the Forum for 'Past Perfect', you will find a lot of discussions.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: did not eat / had not eaten

Anonymous — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 05:23:46 GMT

Hi. did not eat is in the simple past which requires a specific date?
so this in this had not eaten (past perfect) referring to the past would be the correct one?
is my explanation correct? thanks

Re: Since... In... further... or From... to... In...

Grammar Geek — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:56:54 GMT

I'm honestly not clear of the author's intention. I would have used present perfect: Since 1985, they've opened...

Usually, if you read "Since [date]," your assumption would be from that date until the present. If the author wished to specify the period 1985 through 1990, then your rewrite (and the use of the simple past) is correct.

Re: grammar concern

Mister Micawber — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:49:59 GMT

.
You are printing a certificate which states a factual event in historical time. The verb tense you use has nothing to do with when you conceive, print or present the certificate. Use the simple past with the date service began and the date service finished.

Re: Please, help me with this question

Goodman — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:58:29 GMT

Hi Anon,

Aside from Clive's explanation, may I offer you this scenario.
Picture this:

Itâs Saturday. You got up at 6 am this morning (completed simple past act)and itâs now 8 oâclock. You have been up for 2 hours studying for a test on Monday. (this condition still holds true at this time)

You read all your e-mails at 8:15 (completed) but you have not replied yet ( this act is pending but condition is true).

8:30 am -You felt hungry so you went to the kitchen (completed act)

You put 2 slices of bread in the toaster and made some coffee while reading in the kitchen. (completed)

Suddenly, the phone rang and you looked at the clock on the wall.(simple past & completed) Itâs now 9 am. It is Julie wanting to know if you are going to the beach with her as you promised yesterday (completed). You have just now remembered the date...

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

Ant_222 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:57:31 GMT

Hello, Hoa Thai.

As always, it's been interesting to read through your post!

«The issue we have been dealing with here boils down to one question â âIn one sentence, grammatically and semantically, could we use both simple past and present perfect for one item?â»

I wouldn't say so, because there're different ways of combining these tenses and, as you write below, they should be "re-examined, augmented, and complemented for specific cases".

«Evidently, the example from BBCâs Teaching English site, âThink about a film you have seen recently, what was it called?â, affirmatively answers that question. The non-definitive âa filmâ associates well with the present perfect âhave seenâ; and it is all right to use âwasâ to pin down an instance in the past once our mind fixes on the selected item (i.e., simple past).»

Hmmm. What do you think about this:
«Think about the film that you have seen last, what was it called?»

«When we use the superlative âthe â¦â , it does not matter what adjective we attach to it - be it âlastâ, âbestâ, âworstâ, âthe most..â, etcâ¦ we ask our mind to lock on to a moment in time (i.e., simple past).»

Yeah, as I said above, and you wrote below, "the last" differs from "the best" and "the worst" in being related to time... And I don't thinks such cinstructions focus us on specific moments of time. Rather, they direct our attention at specific items/things...

«Apparently, millions of hits from a simple Google search prove that some minds do accept such ungrammatical construct without any reservation. As an example, âWhat was the best movie you have ever seen?â could be seen in many forumsâ questions, blogs, and at Yahooâs Answer site.»

How do you know it's ungrammatical?

«This is what I think they mean to say: âWhat was the best movie among all the movies you have ever seen?â»

Yes, and I think the "among..." insetrtio may be omitted with _no_ loss in meaning.

«From the naturalness point of view, people donât pause to think much about grammar...»,

Talking about natives (and very good non-natives)?

«...However, that naturalness - albeit seemingly ungrammatical - must have been ever permitted unless we find an opportunity to re-validate its correctness.»

You English here is too good, I can't follow your thought. Do you mean that the naturalness viewpoint should be preferred unless proven wrong?