+0
Is there any usage as to Before past perfect tense , past tense ?

is this true ? ::: before ı had gone out , he came us. why ?
+1
See the discussion in Past Simple or Past Perfect.
No definite conclusion was reached there.
I make another attempt below.
_____

He came us makes no sense. Did you mean he came to see us?

_____

The use of past perfect in before-clauses is actually quite common. The use of the tenses in such patterns is perplexing because it appears to be a violation of what is normally advised, namely: The action which occurs previously in time is expressed in the past perfect tense, and the action which occurs later in time is expressed in the past tense. This normal situation is shown below. Note how both actions actually took place. The letter really was written and the letter really was mailed.

I mailed the letter that I had written earlier that morning.
Before I mailed the letter, I had written it, of course!


But what if one of the actions did not occur at all? To express this situation, the past perfect in the before-clause is available. This pattern implies the non-completion of the action in the before-clause. Here, the action in the main clause interrupts the intended action (in the before-clause) before it can be completed.

Before I had mailed the letter, a gust of wind blew it out the window and into a mud puddle.
(The letter was not mailed*, but a gust of wind really did blow it out the window.)
(I had not yet mailed the letter at the time the gust of wind blew it out the window.)

The same pattern is used in the example you cited above:

Before I had gone out, he came to see us.
(I did not really go out*, but he really did come to see us.)
(I had not yet gone out at the time that he came to see us.)

This pattern has a sort of family resemblance to the so-called third conditional:

If I had gone out, I would have missed him (when he came to see us).
(I had not gone out, so I did not miss him.)

CJ

*These actions did not take place at least up to the time of the action of the main clause. It is possible that they eventually took place later, but that information is not included in the sentence itself.
1 2
Comments  
I think you need to read this:
past BEFORE past perfect
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
 CalifJim's reply was promoted to an answer.
CalifJim But what if one of the actions did not occur at all? To express this situation, the past perfect in the before-clause is available. This pattern implies the non-completion of the action in the before-clause. Here, the action in the main clause interrupts the intended action (in the before-clause) before it can be completed.

Before I had mailed the letter, a gust of wind blew it out the window and into a mud puddle.
(The letter was not mailed*, but a gust of wind really did blow it out the window.)
(I had not yet mailed the letter at the time the gust of wind blew it out the window.)

This pattern has a sort of family resemblance to the so-called third conditional

You may have a point, especially with cases such as the 2nd example here:
-----
The plus-perfect (past tense) is used both in main sentences and in subordinate clauses; the conjunctions chiefly used are when, after, before, till. A Few examples of this tense from Stevenson's T may here suffice:

Nor would he allow anyone to leave him till he had drunk himself sleepy

.... Before I had heard a dozen words, I would not have shown myself for all the world.

Jespersen, A Modern English Grammar, vol. IV, p. 82
-----
wind past tense wound
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Anonymouswind past tense wound
A curious comment, given the topic of the thread.
Note also:
wound - past tense wounded
CJ
Jim, thank you. An embellishing explanation! [Y]
Second that! [Y]
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Let me try to make sense of this one more time. Please bear with me.

a) He came to see us before I had gone out.
(= I did not go out Re: your explanation)

What about the use of the past simple after "before"?

b) He came to see us before I went out.

Does it mean "he came to see us and then I went out." (i.e. no interruption implied)? If that is the case, is it equally acceptable to say:

c) He had come to see us before I went out.

What about these sentences? I saw it in a grammar book. Would I be correct in saying that the past perfect implies interruption whereas the past simple simply gives the chronological order of the event?

d) They were given help and advice before they had made the decision.
(= the decision making was interrupted by the giving of help and advice?)

e) They were given help and advice before they made the decision.
(= the help and advice were given and then the decision was made)

What about this sentence? Is it the same as e)?

f) They had been given help and advice before they made the decision.

Thank you.
Show more