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

Re: Please, help me with my questions

Grammar Geek — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:17:55 GMT

Hi Thammy,

1) Please, is the underlined order below, correct?

"It's a beautiful, big and great museum"

These three make an awkward combination. I think "great" is probably the problem. It's a big, beautiful museum. It's a terrific, big, beautiful museum. (Don't say "great big" because that sounds like it's very big insetadn of both big and great.)

2) - Is it also correct to write/say "coastal cities" for those that are spotted near the coast ?
You can certainly say "coastal cities" but I don't think you want to say "spotted." Do you mean "located" or "sited"?

3) What is the correct verb tense for this sentence:

" I have stayed for four weeks in 2007 and made new friends there."

(or)

"I stayed for four weeks in 2007 and made new friends there."

Generally when you refer to a specific time in the past ("in 2007") you use simple past.

3b. (In both sentences I believe it's better to omit the preposition "for" to avoid 'cacophony', isn't it?)

The first "for" may be glided over. I stayed fuhfour. I wouldn't omit it outright.

Re: tense - why wrong?

Kooyeen — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:56:46 GMT

Applicant: Hello. I'm here for that job for which you need a technician. My grammar is good. For example, I never end a sentence with a preposition. *smile*
Employer: Oh, that don't matter. *smile* We gotta do some stuff with computers, websites, y'know, crap like that. *light a cigar* *cough* Really, that ain't no problem... *smile*

Anyway, the rule "no past perfect with a specific point in time" doesn't exist in any ESL book. The rule you usually find is actually "no present perfect with a specific point in time". Nothing is said about the past perfect, which is perfectly ok even when we want to refer to very specific points in time. Sometimes it's even necessary:

I was so shocked. I had just checked it a few seconds before, and it was there. Then I turned my head and it was gone. There's a ghost there, trust me.
If I'm not mistaken, you can't use a simple past there, and say "I just checked". I guess it's because of that "just". Right?

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: 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

inclusion vs. separation (present perfect and simple past)

Hoa Thai — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:07:10 GMT

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

Trouble understanding this...

SeekerOfPeace — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 03:20:03 GMT

Right or wrong?

âFor a moment¹, I even thought² that this was some sort of test³ and that this woman was someone from the head office⁴, testing my loyalty⁵.â

1: Prepositional phrase used adverbially.

2: Main clause

3: Dependant clause

4: Dependant clause

5: Participial phrase

For: preposition,

A: indefinite determinant

Moment: noun

I: personal pronoun, 1^st person,

Even: adverb, expressing surprise

That: relative pronoun?

This: pronoun

Was: L.V. simple past

Some: determiner, determines âsortâ, indefinite article

Sort: noun

Of: preposition

Test: noun

And: subordinating conjunction, (I thought and could only be used as a coordinating conjunction??)

This: definite article

Woman: noun

Was: L.V. simple past

Someone: indefinite pronoun

From: preposition, links someone and head office

Head office: compound noun+ head used as an adjective rather than a noun here.

Testing: present participle (verb?)

My: determiner

Loyalty: noun

Re: Analysis of a sentence

Philip — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:29:59 GMT

SeekerOfPeace wrote:
Hello everyone,

I'm trying to practice my understanding of grammar. I'm trying to be as detailed as possible in my explanations.

Is the following analysis right? Is there anything I should/could add to it?

Thanks.

The moment she entered¹, the woman presented a sharp contrast to our shiny store² with its bright lighting and neatly arranged shelves³.

1: dependant clause (subordinate clause)

2: Independent clause (main clause)

3: Prepositional phrase

The: Definite article, defines moment

Moment: noun, countable

She: personal pronoun, 3^rd person

Entered: Simple past, Simple past

The: Definite article, defines woman

Presented: Verb, simple past, synonym in this context: provide

A: non-definite article I've always used the term 'indefinite'.

Sharp: adjective

To: preposition

Our: Possessive pronoun (personal pronoun, possessive case) Can I say possessive pronoun?

With: preposition (descriptive)

Its: pronoun, replaces store

Bright: adjective

Lighting: noun

And: conjunction

Neatly: adverb

Arranged: adjective

Shelves: noun

Excellent work! 100%

Analysis of a sentence

SeekerOfPeace — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:53:51 GMT

Hello everyone,

I'm trying to practice my understanding of grammar. I'm trying to be as detailed as possible in my explanations.

Is the following analysis right? Is there anything I should/could add to it?

Thanks.

The moment she entered¹, the woman presented a sharp contrast to our shiny store² with its bright lighting and neatly arranged shelves³.

1: dependant clause (subordinate clause)

2: Independent clause (main clause)

3: Prepositional phrase

The: Definite article, defines moment

Moment: noun, countable

She: personal pronoun, 3^rd person

Entered: Simple past, Simple past

The: Definite article, defines woman

Presented: Verb, simple past, synonym in this context: provide

A: non-definite article

Sharp: adjective

To: preposition

Our: Possessive pronoun (personal pronoun, possessive case) Can I say possessive pronoun?

With: preposition (descriptive)

Its: pronoun, replaces store

Bright: adjective

Lighting: noun

And: conjunction

Neatly: adverb

Arranged: adjective

Shelves: noun

Re: Can you say: near past + recent past weeks ??

Goodman — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:49:21 GMT

Liat,

Let's not "muddy" up the water on present perfect by starting another debate on "Mr." vs. "Mr". Event the experts have varying opinions. I understand that you have probably an image that my English is not quite native, which is ok. I take no offense. Debates are based on what you know and how you see about certain things which is the case here. Is there anything wrong with "debatable"?

Now back to the present perfect questions about using "ago" and "past time", The rule of thumb the Iâve learned is this:

Present perfect tense goes with âsinceâ and âforâ, much like a an elegant carriage goes with horses. Of course, we can put a couple of âdonkeysâ in front of the carriage, much like using âagoâ and âyesterday, or âpast few weeksâ with present perfect.

The carriage still moves along, but not very gracefully. Here is some write-ups about present prefect use with prepositional and time phrases. Perhaps it may be helpful for some.

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2527/presentperfect.html

Simple Past

1. The simple past is used to talk about completed actions in the past

2. The simple past is often used with expressions that refer to points of time in the past

4 o'clock/2.12/the end of year/Christmas

Tuesday/19th March/the 21st/New Year's Day

January/1999/the 1990s/summer

no prepositions

yesterday/yesterday morning/last Monday/next April/a few days ago/ the day before yesterday/when I was young

Present perfect simple

3. Present perfect is used to talk about a present situation which is a result of something that happened at an unspecified time in the past.
Therefore we do not use specific time expression such as yesterday, last week, etc.

8. Stative verbs + for and since

The present perfect simple is often used with for and since and stative verbs to talk about things that began in the past and have continued up to now.

I have known about the plans to spin off this service from the company. (And I know now.)

Re: Present Perfect vs. Past simple

Tuatara — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:07:05 GMT

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 if I use a since clause that I cannot (should not) use simple past tense?

Since Monday, he wrote a novel, climbed Mount Everest, and saved a heart-attack victim."

Is the preceding sentence grammatically wrong (besides being an impossible string of feats?)?

Neither simple past tense nor present perfect require mention of time. If you do choose to mention a time element, it seems that preposition choice is significant.

I don't understand the difference between the following:

He wrote a novel.

He has written a novel.

Do you have any ideas what the difference between the two are?