http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aTenses+tag%3aWritingSearch results for 'tag:Tenses tag:Writing' matching tags 'Tenses' and 'Writing'en-USXMOD (Build: 3715.30106)http://www.englishforums.com/English/ASimpleExplanationRequired-Implication/mqmbd/post.htm#1085307Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:10:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1085307trunksWell, one thing that i know for sure about the perfect tenses is that they always represent two actions. E.g. Since the 1980s, the number of Clientele users has grown from a mere 1000 to a remarkable 1 billion. (This represents the fact that the actions took place from the past and might or might not continue at present) So i wanted to know when i say, &quot;you have done your homework&quot;, whether it meams I started doing it in the past and finished some time in the present. But also when i say, &quot;you had done your homework&quot;, it means i started doing the action in the past and i also finished it in the past. So does the simple past (i.e. the sentence: you did your homework) mean &quot;i also...http://www.englishforums.com/English/SentenceAnalysisExceptConjunction-Preposition/mqdjw/post.htmThu, 11 Mar 2010 11:26:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1081888english 1b3a) The second conditional expresses a present or future tense except when the conditional is embedded within a main clause . In such cases, the tense expressed is that expressed by the verb in the main clause. 1) Is except a preposition and thus the words following a noun clause? 2) Or is it a conjunction? 3) Also, are both these sentences correct alternatives to the above? b) The second conditional expresses a present or future tense except when the conditional is embedded within a main clause, in which case the tense expressed is that expressed by the verb in the main clause. <span sthttp://www.englishforums.com/English/GrammarProblems/mqccm/post.htm#1081595Thu, 11 Mar 2010 05:08:43 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1081595califjimThe past is cut off from the present. Actions expressed in the past tense happened completely in the past. They are finished, and they do not continue have relevance for the current situation. You can even add the specific time that the event happened. When you use the past, you can always imagine a gap between the time the action happened and the moment you mention it. He was a criminal. (then, at that time. Nothing is said about the time between when he was a criminal and today.) He never informed us. (then, during that specific time period when we expected him to inform us. Nothing is said about the time between then and today.) He presented his ID card to the police. (then, at that time, at some definite time in the past....http://www.englishforums.com/English/DidYouEver/mqcvb/post.htmThu, 11 Mar 2010 03:05:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1081507musicgoldHi, The following sentences are from a stand-up comedy show. However they are also commonly heard in daily conversations. I don’t understand how the tense in such sentences is changed. For example, in #1 and 2, the first clause is in past and the second clause in present. 1. Did you ever go to shake hands with a guy and he doesn’t notice? 2. Did you ever look at someone else’s cart and say, “Look at the kind of food they eat!”? 3. Did you ever belched and almost puked? Thank you, MG.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldWill/3/mprlv/Post.htm#1079596Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:48:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1079596english 1b3Great. Thanks. So these are correct: a) Jake is killing three men. And he will kill again . b) Jake has killed three men. And he will kill again. Incidentally, I would like to revert to the in-between period. Please don&#39;t bang your head on the computer screen. With the past tense, this in-between period is clear for me to visualize and understand. Anterior event, in between period, posterior event (using would). <span style="COLOR:rgb(0,0,255);http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldWill/3/mprlv/Post.htm#1078206Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:01:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1078206english 1b3And please don&#39;t give up on me with the in-between period. I think I understand it better than you think. I asked the question, why is would rarely used in the main clause to express future in the past? The answer is because rarely do we want to show this time relationship (the in-between period): The in-between period is a point of view where there is both an anterior and posterior event in relation to this in-between period--hence the name &#39;in-between&#39;. Jake killed three men. And he would kill again . = This is past tense, and the in-between period is expressed. Jake kills three men. And he will kill again . = I just don&#39;t understand why this doesn&#39;t express in-between period, and...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ConditionalCasePastSubjunctive/2/mprkz/Post.htm#1077703Sun, 07 Mar 2010 11:07:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1077703english 1b3In my opinion, websites oversimplify their explanations of conditional sentences, unwisely suggesting each and every conditional sentence can be classified into one of four types, namely, the first, second, third and zero conditional. Since there are hundreds that do not fit into one of these four, it seems illogical to bother creating them in the first place. Or even if there is sense in creating these formulae, it seems obvious to caution the readers that these four do not cover all possible variations. But the websites I have read do not mention this at all. What&#39;s more, some sites say the difference between the 1st and 2nd conditional is that of likelihood, and others say it is that of tense. Thanks to you, I now...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IWasCalling/mpzrv/post.htmSun, 07 Mar 2010 03:17:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1077396musicgoldHi, The following are commonly used expressions in phone conversations. I don’t why people talk in the past / past continuous tense when the action they are talking about is happening at that moment. 1. I was calling to check in with you about the resume I sent last week. 2. I just wanted to say thank you, everybody, for joining us today. Thanks, MG.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldWill/2/mprlv/Post.htm#1077111Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:05:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1077111english 1b3Jake has killed three men. And he will kill again Why is is structured like that? With the past tense, the first clause was unchanged, but the second added &#39;would.&#39; Why is the corresponding word &#39;will&#39; not used to show this effect? Thankshttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ConditionalCasePastSubjunctive/mprkz/post.htm#1076980Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:12:11 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1076980califjimSo the main clause will always dictate which conditional we use? But if the conditional sentence is not embedded within another main clause, the conditional used is determined by whether the situation is &#39;the real world&#39; or &#39;an imagined alternate world&#39;? Yes. I would trust this as a good general guideline, all the while recognizing that you may find individual examples in written texts where some other principle has governed the choice of tenses, based on the wishes of the author. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ConditionalCasePastSubjunctive/mprkz/post.htm#1076298Sat, 06 Mar 2010 01:43:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1076298english 1b3leave home early to make sure I will have extra time if I get lost. Or I left home early to make sure I would have extra time if I got lost. When dealing with first and second conditional sentences, such as the two I&#39;ve quoted above, I understand that &#39;would&#39; goes with the past subjunctive, while &#39;will&#39; goes with the present indicative. But what determines (in the sentences quoted) what tense/mood we use in the if clause--that is, &#39;got&#39; (past subjunctive) or &#39;get&#39; (present indicative)? It seems from your above examples that the tense of the main clause ( leave and left ) dictates the tense/mood of the if clause. But I thought the likelihood of the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldWill/mprlv/post.htmFri, 05 Mar 2010 21:38:21 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1076138english 1b3Why is it that when &#39;would&#39; is used as the past tense of &#39;will&#39; it is rarely found in the main clause and instead is usually (always?) found in subordinate clauses (often in indirect speech)? Is this below an exception? He was an evil man. He would kill again. Thankshttp://www.englishforums.com/English/NotOnlyButAlso/mxhdg/post.htm#1073281Wed, 03 Mar 2010 04:47:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1073281vocabfishNot only did (past simple) he run, but he also talked (past simple) . Notice that the tense in each clause is the same. - vocabfishhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ModalPerfect/mxdhm/post.htm#1072862Tue, 02 Mar 2010 19:54:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1072862califjimCould is past tense of can. In terms of its form, yes. But in terms of usage, note that the &quot;past forms&quot; of modals ( would, could, should, might ) are frequently borrowed into present (or future) time situations for various reasons, including politeness and uncertainty. Why does your first example refer to the present? Because I want to know now what the cause of the loud sound is. This is not a story about a loud sound I heard months ago. can or could or might in that type of question can be paraphrased as &quot; Is it possible that (it is an airplane) ?&quot;. Is it only the past form with certain uses of &#39;could&#39;? I think the discussion above has answered this question. Because of its spelling, it is always a...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IndependentDependentCluase/2/mnpgd/Post.htm#1071824Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:54:36 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1071824english 1b3An experienced animal trainer was killed Wednesday in an accident with a killer whale at SeaWrold in Orlando, law enforement and park officials said. Place quote marks around the quoted material. This is direct speech. In direct speech, the words containing the person saying the quoted material is an independent clause: law enforcement and park officials said=subject + verb=main clause The quote material is also a main clause, assuming a subject and verb is present. An experienced animal trainer was killed...=subject + verb=main clause Therefore, there are two main clauses in the entire sentence. If however, the sentence is changed to reported or indirect speech, the quote material becomes...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ProofreadPersuasiveSpeech/mxrbm/post.htmMon, 01 Mar 2010 05:41:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1071063schou1994The Benefits Of Animal Testing In 1990 the founder of PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Ingrid Newkirk told a reporter that if an AIDS cure resulted from animal research, &quot;we&#39;d still be against it.&quot; I appreciate the efforts that animal activists put forth on securing animal rights, emphasizing that animals are not ours to be tested on. However, when it comes to ensuring human life, I disagree. Should we not take the best lead we have to cure a disease like AIDS, which has already killed 28million people? Should we take thousands of animals and place their lives above millions of people, which they have saved and will save? Scientific effort based on animal testing is a sacrifice that must be made to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThoughtOrThinkHere/2/mnwmz/Post.htm#1069379Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:02:11 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1069379billjquote user=&quot;BillJ&quot;] We can not choose to ignore the fact that I &quot;wish..I had&quot; is subjective conveniently just because it didn&#39;t fit the purpose . I agree with CJ&#39;s explanation completely. I wish...I had was not in the original context of the question. That&#39;s all! Of course you should ignore something that is irrelevant! The point is, as I said, that this thread is about tense, not mood. It doesn&#39;t matter which particular verb is used, just so long as it demonstrates that a main clause can be simple present whilst its subordinate is past perfective, which is all that English1b asked. So, forget &#39;mood&#39; (subjunctive or indicative); it&#39;s not an issue here at all - raising it...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ThoughtOrThinkHere/2/mnwmz/Post.htm#1069291Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:30:24 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1069291billjI wish . This is somewhat treading the water of subjunctive in my opinion. So it is not in the same calss od sentence. The original question in this thread, from Razer, was about tense, not mood. They are different attributes of the verb phrase. &#39;I wish &#39; when analysed for tense is simple present/past perfective. Whether the subordinate clause is subjunctive mood or not is another matter. BillJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htm#1068784Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:15:00 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1068784english 1b3Yes, but in modern English there&#39;s a tendency to use Past Simple: «If I was you, I would...», in which case it is a pure tense Yes, but even this is a subjunctive in the subordinate clause: If I walked home, I would be exhausted by now.http://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htm#1068747Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:23:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1068747dimsumexpressThis is my experience in learning the subjunctives. This word haunted me for several years because I couldn&#39;t understand the different moods and subjunctive verbs clearly enough to use it correctly. Although not an expert, I feel what I know about subjunctives now can help me navigate through this &quot;mess&quot;. It would seem to me that if someone wants to set the mood up for a subjunctive conversation or passage, the odds is, he would most likely say &quot;if I were you...&quot; in north Amercia rather than &quot;If I was you...&quot; if he is a main stream educated professional. I understand, however, &quot;If I was ....&quot; may be used when something you said in a social gathering which may have caused other to feel...http://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htm#1068303Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:10:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1068303ant_222This is untrue. An &#39;if clause&#39; is not a main clause, so my terminology and point holds true. Yes, I was incorrect about this, but does not affect the rest of my post. I will repeat my main point: Unreal tense is used to describe a hypothetical situation, while the subjunctive is used to express an action in or a result of this situation. Antonhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htm#1067758Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:29:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1067758english 1b3Unreal tense is the tense used to express the &#39;unreal&#39; action/situation. It is used in the subordinate clause in the &quot;I wish + clause&quot; structure&quot;, while in conditionals (&quot;If (clause) I would ...&quot;) the hypothesis is expressed in the main clause (the If-clause). But let not terminology issues confuse you :) This is untrue. An &#39;if clause&#39; is not a main clause, so my terminology and point holds true.http://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htm#1067733Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:57:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1067733ant_222Unreal tenses use the past tense for present situations and the past perfect for past situations. For example: This is true for constructions like &quot;I would rather + clause&quot;, &quot;I wish + clause&quot; and for the antecedent of &#39;unreal&#39; conditionals. In your further examples the structure is &quot;I would rather + verb&quot;, which is completely different. Here &quot;I&quot; is the subject and the verb is bound to it. Each of the structures has its own use. When speaking about yourself, say: &quot;I would rather kick the ball&quot;. When speaking about your desire (or preference) toward someone/something else, say: &quot;I would rather he kicked the ball&quot;. These structures are not interchangeable at all. Is...http://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htmThu, 25 Feb 2010 21:30:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1067706english 1b3Unreal tenses use the past tense for present situations and the past perfect for past situations. For example: &quot;I would rather we had never met&quot; =past perfect for past time &quot;I would rather you smoked outside.&quot; = past for present time But what about these (where the sentence is no longer complex): &quot;I would rather kick the ball&quot; = present situation, using modal tense, not the past tense &quot;I would rather have kicked the ball&quot; = using modal perfect tense for past situation 1) Is this just an exception to the rule, or is it because unreal tenses are reserved for subordinate clauses? 2) Also, why do sites say the unreal tense is the past...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseFutureTenseSentence/mnbcq/post.htm#1066845Thu, 25 Feb 2010 03:33:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1066845khoffHi, flyingboy! Welcome to English Forums! Please try to use correct spelling and capitalization in your posts here (&quot;I have&quot; instead of &quot;i hv&quot;) -- some of us are allergic to the kind of abbreviations that are common on the internet. Thank you!http://www.englishforums.com/English/EnglishGrammarHelpPlz/mnczv/post.htm#1066825Thu, 25 Feb 2010 03:00:39 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1066825grammar geekHi Anon, Sorry, but you have to do your own work. We&#39;ll check the answers that YOU come up with. 1 &amp; 2 are incomprehensible. 4 has a tense issue All of them need correct capitalization.http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowWriteParagrahDeferents-Tenses/mnbmn/post.htm#1066644Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:31:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1066644dimsumexpressIn addition to G.G. comment, please note the red markings. They should be corrected along with the sentences you are asked to post. i have to write a paragraph 5 di fe rent tenses and i don &#39; t knwo how. c an u tell me how to do it ?http://www.englishforums.com/English/Gerund/mnbjg/post.htm#1066614Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:04:57 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1066614billjJon has a wide range of experience, having worked in all areas of the firm. 1. I wonder why comma is used. 2. I wonder if &quot;having&quot; is &quot;gerund&quot; or anything. Hi 1. The sequence &#39;having worked ..&#39; is a dependent clause and it&#39;s quite normal to separate such clauses with a comma. If you speak it, you&#39;ll probably find that you naturally pause between the two clauses. 2. No, &#39;having&#39; is not a gerund, it&#39;s an auxiliary verb (part of the verb phrase &#39;having worked&#39;) because that&#39;s how it&#39;s functioning. You can also tell it&#39;s a verb because &#39;having worked&#39; is modified by the adverbial phrase &#39;in all areas of the firm&#39;. The subject of...http://www.englishforums.com/English/JustQuitSmoking/mmnwk/post.htm#1066482Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:08:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1066482gleb_chebrikoffDear Mr Micawber, the issue in question is not that elementary as it may superficially seem to be. Telling students that the distinction between tense forms is neutralised in our example does perfectly well in most instances, but those who seek further explanations may become confused by a number of expert opinions, such as this one: &#39; Just , in the sense of &#39;very recent past&#39;, often occurs with present perfect, but is unacceptable with the simple past tense &#39;. This unambiguous statement by Reginald Arthur Close refers mostly (but not exclusively) to BrE, and I daren&#39;t call a purist the grammarian whose books many people (including you, I suspect), find helpful in their teaching practice. Another thing is that,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ModalTenses/mmlwn/post.htm#1065376Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:49:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1065376califjimYou&#39;re getting into a rat&#39;s nest of terminology here. Different authors have different ways of classifying verbs, tenses, and clauses. Modal verbs may be seen as a subclass of finite verbs, for example. Also, some authors prefer &quot;tensed&quot; and &quot;non-tensed&quot; as the properties of verbs; whereas they use the terms &quot;finite&quot; and &quot;non-finite&quot; to describe clauses. Nevertheless, in a rough sort of way, your analysis can be considered correct. I don&#39;t think there is any &quot;right answer&quot; on these matters. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ModalTenses/mmlwn/post.htm#1064769Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:59:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1064769califjimIs would in the result clause of the second conditional another example of a past view-point verb being borrowed into the present viewpoint? Yes. That&#39;s how I view it. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Would/mmlqw/post.htm#1064760Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:46:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1064760califjimDoes anybody here know of a rule that doesn&#39;t involve looking at &quot;would&quot; as a conditional? Yes. It&#39;s the rule that governs all modal verbs regardless of their use or meaning. A modal verb must be followed by a base form (that is, a bare infinitive). Always. The modals are will, would, shall, should, can, could, may, might, and must . Note that would is in that list, so it, too, must always be followed by a base form. As Grammar Geek points out, it is a mistake to confuse a base form with the present tense, even when, by coincidence, the two take the same form (i.e., same spelling). The verb form that occurs after a modal verb should never be regarded as the present tense. You have to consider the whole verb phrase...http://www.englishforums.com/English/MatrixVerbPastSubordinateVerb-Present/mmwkz/post.htm#1063719Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:38:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1063719mister micawberWe've got a couple of problems here, I think. I won't tell you that this sentence is never uttered as is, but 'doubted if' is a doubtful construction, and the present tense in the 'if' clause sounds odd even if you want it to mean what you suggest-- because the sentence makes no mention of present belief whatsoever. You would be referring to possible pigheadedness if anything. I doubted whether he was pigheaded.http://www.englishforums.com/English/FutureTenseParagraph/mmgnw/post.htm#1063444Mon, 22 Feb 2010 01:10:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1063444andrewaffidonSunday, your too far away! The other sentences are correct, but this one should be : Sunday, you&#39;re too far away. probably just a typo. :-Dhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/FutureTense/mmgxv/post.htmSun, 21 Feb 2010 18:58:00 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1063184mnicholas13How did i do? I can&#39;t wait until Valentines Day gets here next sunday. I can&#39;t wait to see all of the things he has planned. It is going to be our 2nd Valentines day together. Before the big day, i have things i need to do to prepare myself. I need to go get my hair done. He is going to flip-out when he sees it. I would also need a nice outfit for the planned night event. Sunday, your too far away!http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htm#1062534Sun, 21 Feb 2010 04:25:26 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062534yankeeWell, as I see it, context within the sentence itself will also influence things. You took your example from a website that was attempting to illustrate what the use of the past perfect will achieve, how it works on a timeline. That goal in itself is context, and it obviously had an influence on their decision to use the past perfect in that sentence. If I looked at that same sentence simply as a stand-alone sentence on a blank sheet of paper, for example, I would see no need at all to use the past perfect because the word &quot;before&quot; is more than adequate to establish which activity happened first. I don&#39;t need the past perfect for that. But the the context of a narrative that might be jumping back and forth in time, the...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htm#1062474Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:40:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062474english 1b3agree with you that the context of a passage as a whole can play a part in the tense choice of the main clause. What else is considered then? Am I right to say the subordinate clause has some influence? I asked this question elsewhere and the responder said only the context of the whole passage influences the tense of the main clause.http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htm#1062464Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:28:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062464yankeeHi English 1b3 I agree with you that the context of a passage as a whole can play a part in the tense choice of the main clause. As a simple statement of fact, in a text that basically recounts things in the order they happened, I&#39;d prefer your sentence written this way: - Before I went to school, I ate a big breakfast. (I like Ray&#39;s wording even better, though.) However, in a narrative the past perfect may sometimes be more appropriate. If there has already been narration about some things that happened after you arrived at school, and then the author goes back and mentions having had a big breakfast (maybe as important explanatory backgound information for something that happened later), then I can easily imagine...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htm#1062436Sun, 21 Feb 2010 01:43:15 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062436english 1b3The sentence is from this site: http://www.myenglishteacher.net/pastperfecttense.html Can you explain why you think it is wrong, please? And do you have any thoughts regarding my initial question, not the sentence itself?http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htm#1062426Sun, 21 Feb 2010 01:40:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062426rayhBefore I went to school, I had eaten a big breakfast. I cant&#39; think of a situation where I would consider this correct, it should be &quot;...I ate a big...&quot; even better would be &quot;Before I left for school I ate a big breakfast.&quot;http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectMainClause/mmvdk/post.htmSun, 21 Feb 2010 01:35:21 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062425english 1b3The tense of a verb in the subordinate clause changes in accordance with the tense of the verb in the main clause. I think the tense of a verb in the main clause changes in accordance with the context of the passage as a whole. But, in this sentence below, it seems as though the tense of the verb in the main clause is changing in accordance with the tense of the verb in the subordinate clause: Before I went to school, I had eaten a big breakfast. Does this mean that the tense of verb in a subordinate clause can sometimes have a bearing on the tense of the verb in the main clause?http://www.englishforums.com/English/ConceptOfRelativePronoun/mmccx/post.htm#1062367Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:55:55 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062367ed_shawAre you saying here that &#39;built&#39; is working as a linking verb and requires a complement, thus meaning it&#39;s currently ungrammatical? No, not all. I am very sorry. Astute of you to point that out and raise that issue. Those thoughts were separate. My comment on linking verbs was intended to illustrate the possibility of confusion that might be introduced by applying the term &quot;linking&quot; to a relative pronoun, when &quot;linking&quot; is an established term in grammar study that applies, normally, to some form of the &quot;to be&quot; verb: is, are, am, was, etc. John was skiiing. (Was functions as a linking verb to link the subject with the predicate -- establish tense, reinforce number, all that. ) A clause has...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectsFinerPoints/mlxqm/post.htm#1062220Sat, 20 Feb 2010 20:40:29 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1062220english 1b3I actually already created a thread discussing the two meanings and the ambiguities within. Have you anything to add in reference to choosing the tense and aspect of the main clause? I was told when choosing the tense of the main clause, I make my decision soely based on the time the main clause happens in relation to the greater context (the overall tense). But I thought this didn&#39;t sound right, because I&#39;m sure some tenses and aspects in main clauses sometimes are considered in relation to the subordinate clause: Before I walked home, I had bought myself dinner.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ConditionalSubjunctiveIndicative/mmrkj/post.htm#1061417Sat, 20 Feb 2010 00:05:43 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1061417mister micawberI am a great fan of tense simplification in dependent clauses, and teach it. The two 'would's sound awkward at best, and the past perfect is overkill.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhileSentencesDrivingNuts/mlpnb/post.htm#1060960Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:58:41 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060960mr wordyDon&#39;t you find it a little more awkward to use the continuous in the first clause and the simple tense after the while. Not in your examples. It does have a slightly different &quot;feel&quot; to it though (as, indeed, do all of the different combinations of tenses). Are there sentence that you wouldn&#39;t say, like the ones I have in bold? I can imagine using all of them if the appropriate situation arose.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WhileSentencesDrivingNuts/mlpnb/post.htm#1060914Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:02:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060914alc24Don&#39;t you find it a little more awkward to use the continuous in the first clause and the simple tense after the while. since the clause after the while is the longer action and it&#39;s usually in the continuous form. Are there sentence that you wouldn&#39;t say, like the ones I have in bold? Thank youhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastPerfectInMainClause/mlxdk/post.htm#1060676Fri, 19 Feb 2010 06:27:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060676dimsumexpresswas told that I shouldn&#39;t decide on the tense and aspect of the main clause by what the subordinate clause is. That is, the tense and aspect should be in relation to the greater text. What I said in the earlier post was a rule of thumb. There are always exeptions and special contexts to be considered. Based on your example, I would say using past tense in the most remote past event and past perfect tense in most recent would be illogical, if not incorrect.( Sorry I had my thought reversed when I wrote the thread, I stand corrected) I am curious where you stand as far as this topic is concerned. What is your preference between these two sentences: 1) I worked at Cisco for 5 years before I had started my own consulting...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TenseAspectsFinerPoints/mlxqm/post.htmFri, 19 Feb 2010 05:07:42 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060625english 1b3I refused to go, until I saw all the pictures. 1) When choosing the tense and aspect of the main clause, I do not consider the subordinate clause to make my decision, do I? That is, when I make the decision, I consider only the main clause in relation to the greater context. In other words, the main clause above could be past perfect or past simple, but it would depend on when the refusing happens in relation to the overall tense of the passage. 2) Also, how come we have a past perfect to show that one action happened before another in the past, but we have no auxiliary verb to show taking the example above that the &#39;until&#39; clause happens after the past simple main clause...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastPerfectInMainClause/mlxdk/post.htm#1060614Fri, 19 Feb 2010 04:54:43 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060614english 1b3Hi, guys and girls I asked this elsewhere and was told that I shouldn&#39;t decide on the tense and aspect of the main clause by what the subordinate clause is. That is, the tense and aspect should be in relation to the greater text. What do you have to say about this? Right or wrong?http://www.englishforums.com/English/TwoVerbsDifferentTensesSameSentence/mlxjj/post.htm#1060543Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:12:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060543mister micawberOf course you may have verbs of different tenses in the same sentence ( I ate breakfast yesterday, and I'm going to eat breakfast tomorrow, too )-- but each tense refers to the time of the action of its verb. So if you were sickened at the time of the pain, use 'sickened', but if you were sickened at the time of the writing of the sentence, use 'sickens'. However, you have another problem in your sentence: the 'would' of past practice should appear in the main clause (within the subject), not the subordinate clause. It should read: The pain I would feel when I saw him cry sickens/sickened me.