|
A concept of time
I challenged if one can see the difference:
<<But may you tell any difference, either in time or in meaning?
Ex1: After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
Ex2: After he HAD signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
I will stick to it until I get the tense(s) RIGHT. >>
Both of the sequences are not "out of question".
Ant_222 wrote:
<<I. Past Simple variant. This is when the sequence of actions is evident and OUT OF QUESTION.
II. Past Perfect variant. Such situations happen when THE SEQUENCE OF ACTIONS IS IMPORTANT.>>
My reply: I am sorry. I reviewed and reviewed, but I can not see you have pointed out anything that is "OUT OF QUESTION".
On the other hand, BOTH STRUCTURES ARE IMPORTANT. Please tell me if one sequence is not so really important:
Ex1: After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
Ex2: After he HAD signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
Most of all, in the message you suggested me to review, you have mostly explained the difference between After and When, not the difference between Ex1 and Ex2.
So I am now asking the reason you claim I was not right, as you said:
<<If to follow your reasoning, the sentence
«After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it off.»
can be converted to:
«After he HAD signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it off.» without loss of meaning.
I think, you are not right.>>
May I know what meaning has been missed after the so-called conversion?
«Both of the sequences are not "out of question".»
Of course, no. It is the sequence of actions which may be not the point of discussion. By "out of question" I meant that this fact is not the matter of discussion and is not doubted. It is often the case in simple narration envolving successive actions.
In subordinate clauses Past Perfect is used in order to emphasize that the action desribed in the subordinate clause happened before that of the main clause. The Past Simple variant doen't especially draw the reader's attention to the sequence of actions:
«After Tim had left, I found the lost key. That is why I couldn't give it back to him.» — here the sequence of actions is important. If Tim hadn't left before the key was found, he would have received it back.
«As soon as (or After) I finished my work, I went home» — here the sequence of actions is evident and it is neither emphasized nor doubted.
«May I know what meaning has been missed after the so-called conversion?»
Well, this convertion turns a narration into a sentence that insists that the secretary was asked to send off the letter after it had been signed. The latter sentence could be said in a discussion of the sequence of this two actions.
Ant_222 wrote:
«After Tim had left, I found the lost key. That is why I couldn't give it back to him.» — here the sequence of actions is important. If Tim hadn't left before the key was found, he would have received it back.
My reply: What then if it is in Simple Past? It's the same:
«After Tim left, I found the lost key. That is why I couldn't give it back to him.» — here the sequence of actions is important. If Tim hadn't left before the key was found, he would have received it back.
Any slight difference? Does Past Perfect mean more important than Simple Past? Or what?
Ant_222 wrote:
«As soon as (or After) I finished my work, I went home» — here the sequence of actions is evident and it is neither emphasized nor doubted.
My reply: Again, you forgot to compare with Past Perfect. Does Past Perfect mean the sequence is NOT evident, so that you judged me as "not right"? Or what?
I challenged if one can tell the difference:
<<But may you tell any difference, either in time or in meaning?
Ex1: After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
Ex2: After he HAD signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
I will stick to it until I get the tense(s) RIGHT. >>
Actually, they are very very different indeed. But one cannot tell it in the conventional way. This is the point.
Ant_222 wrote:
«As soon as (or After) I finished my work, I went home» — here the sequence of actions is evident and it is neither emphasized nor doubted.
My reply: Perhaps you mean that because the sequence is now evident, so we don't use Past Perfect. Do I guess right? Should this be true, would you give me an example of After-clause which fails to tell the evident sequence, so we need to use Past Perfect? I don't think you can produce one such example, to tell the truth. If there is such example, you have already posted it.
In your own example:
«After he HAD signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it off.»
I can't see the sequence is not evident if we convert it to Simple Past:
Ex: After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it off.
So, after conversion, where on earth did I miss, so that you judged me as "not right"?
The following is just an idea and is by no means gospel.
After he HAD signed the letter, new information came to light and it was not sent.
Here, the "HAD" may have been added for emphasis - Someone may be trying to explain that work was done even though it ended up being nugatory due to unforeseen circumstances. Perhaps by using HAD, the reader can more easily remember that work was done.
After he signed the letter, he asked the secretary to send it.
In this example, the need to emphasize that work was done is significantly less.
The guest above is myself.
I completely agree with you, Geoff_One. Actually, you wrote the same as I had written before.
«The difference between <after + Simple Past> and <after + Past Perfect> can be seen in the following page:»
It is not clear to me.
Can you show some situations with both present and past backgrounds?
Ant_222 wrote:
<<It is not clear to me.
Can you show some situations with both present and past backgrounds?>>
My reply: Because the context of our discussions contains Simple Present or Present Perfect, so it is a present background. In such background, we seldom use Past Perfect. Isn't this clear enough for you?
In a storybook, on the other hand, we don't use Present Perfect. All you can find is Past Perfect only. Is this not clear enough for you?
Or are you now arguing you cannot see whether it is a commentary or a storybook?
In past background, Past Perfect and Past Progressive express their time relations to Simple Past.
In present background, Present Perfect and Simple Past express their time relations to Simple Present.
In this case, we still can explain all the tenses merely by two notions of time: past and present.
I have long noticed the tenses in a commentary are different from those in a storybook. Sometimes, the two kinds of contexts may be fused into one, as a paragraph of story may be mentioned in the commentaries. However, as a whole, we won't have a big trouble in detecting whether the paragraph is present background or past background.
The structure <after + Simple Past> appears mostly in the present background, whose characteristic is that the context contains present tenses such as Simple Present or Present Perfect. This background is for commentaries, where we will compare the past with the present, so there are both past and present tenses. In this background there are mainly the three tenses: Simple Past, Present Perfect, and Simple Present.
The structure <after + Past Perfect> appears mostly in the past background. This background is for an recount of story, describing actions step by step, in a smooth flow. In this background there are mainly past tenses such as Simple Past, Past Perfect, and Past Progressive.
Below, we may try to see online where the sequences work. The examples are new for today.
---------------------
<after + Simple Past>
If on the web today you search exact match for "after he walked", you may notice the characteristic of the present background. The following examples are taken from the first and second resulting pages:
Ex1: Amy Goodman: Here is some of what Mordechai Vanunu said today right AFTER HE WALKED out of prison. Mordechai Vanunu: I am Mordechai Vanunu, the man behind the publicized article from October 5, 1986. The article was about Israel's.....
Ex2: Two thousand years AFTER HE WALKED the earth, Jesus of Nazareth remains one of the most talked-about and influential people who has ever lived. In the pages that follow, we explore his life, character, teaching and followers.....
Ex3: He only remembers that the day AFTER HE WALKED away, he sat in an airport, looked up at the television and watched Nolan Ryan throw his fifth no-hitter. They had been linked, Ryan and Clyde. They were both hard throwers from Texas.
Ex4: On March 18, 2003, a 20-year old male volunteer fire fighter (the victim) died AFTER HE WALKED into the path of a tractor-trailer truck..... The volunteer fire department has 20 active fire fighters and serves a population of approximately 2,500 in an area of about 8.5 square miles..... Since the incident occurred, the department has revised its standard operating procedures.....
Ex5: A lot of people would like to know what happened to Nicholas Berg AFTER HE WALKED out of Baghdad’s Fanar Hotel on 10 April. They say the 26 year-old American contractor was looking for a taxi when he walked off down the street and into.....
Ex6: In the years AFTER HE WALKED on the Moon, some of literature's biggest names - Stephen Ambrose and James Michener among them - pursued Armstrong's biography with no success. So how is it that a history professor who grew up in Fort.....
Ex7: Columbus- Four years AFTER HE WALKED on the Ohio State football team, John Conroy hugged his father after the Buckeyes' 17-10 defeat to Penn State on Saturday..... If starting right tackle Kirk Barton can't play against Michigan State - and he's still questionable with the knee injury he suffered in the first quarter at Beaver Stadium - freshman Alex Boone, not Conroy, is slated to start in his place.
== For most of the cases above, I didn't even need to click into the web pages to find out, but I still can see present tenses (Simple Present or Present Perfect) in them, so that I know they are present background. However, I did click into some pages to find out, and I admit I saw a writer uses "after he walked" in past background.
------------
<after + Past Perfect>
On the other hand, if we search exact match for "after he had walked", we may notice that the context in which the sequence is, is past background. The following examples are taken from the first resulting page. I did click into the web pages and recognize they are accounts of stories, so I believe the authors use Past Perfect automatically and correctly.
Ex1: AFTER HE HAD WALKED a little farther, Half-Chicken found the wind tangled in some bushes. "Good morning, Half-Chicken. Would you please untangle me, so that I can go on my way?" asked the wind. Half-Chicken untangled the branches.
Ex2: AFTER HE HAD WALKED some 200 miles on foot to the sea to collect salt illegally, the Viceroy started to relieve the punitive salt taxes and the government monopoly. Gandhi also strove to raise the status of untouchables, the caste whom.....
Ex3: AFTER HE HAD WALKED about the world for a long time, he entered into a dark forest, and walked for fourteen days, and still could not find his way out. Then it was once more evening, and he was so tired that he lay down in a thicket and.....
Ex4: AFTER HE HAD WALKED perhaps 10 feet, a stout man stepped between newsman at the edge of the crowd. He extended his right hand, which gripped a Colt .38-caliber revolver, and fired "a single fatal bullet into Oswald's abdomen," as the.....
Ex5: Foster Powell was another pedestrian who became well known AFTER HE HAD WALKED the 402 miles between London & Leeds in just 5 days and 15 hours. It can't go unnoticed that Barclay often interrupted his rigid training-program for boozing.....
== It is present background (because there is present tense), but Past Perfect is used in a past subordinate clause within another past subordinate clause, where Present Perfect is not normally used.
Ex5: So AFTER HE HAD WALKED the whole day, he too came at dusk to the King's palace. There stood the King out on the steps, and asked whither he was bound. "Oh," said Boots, "I'm going about seeing if I can hear of a place."
Ex6: AFTER HE HAD WALKED for a long time, he came to the courtyard of a royal palace, and as he felt weary, he lay down on the grass and fell asleep. Whilst he lay there, the people came and inspected him on all sides, and read on his girdle.....
== Instead of search for "walk", one may try other verbs like "after he had done/ seen/ worked/ etc." You may help check whether the theory of background is feasible or not.
=============
Ant_222 wrote:
«After Tim had left, I found the lost key. That IS why I couldn't give it back to him.» — here the sequence of actions is important. If Tim hadn't left before the key was found, he would have received it back.
My reply: Just because the example contains Simple Present IS, it is a comment, a present background. Therefore, Past Perfect is not suitable. Being important or evident is not the criterion to tell the difference between <after + Simple Past> and <after + Past Perfect>. No Adjectives or Meanings can explain tenses; only Time does.
Ant_222 wrote:
«After Tim had left, I found the lost key. That IS why I couldn't give it back to him.»
My reply: Since you have used "After Tim had left", so I now used it to search for example. I searched exact match for "After Tim had left" in google. I clicked in THE FIRST EXAMPLE OF THE FIRST RESULTING PAGE, and I saw this:
-----------------
Tim Johnson and I were planning on chasing on Friday May 15th, 1998. Our plan was to meet in Hudson, WI and go from there. AFTER TIM HAD LEFT for Hudson from Wisconsin Rapids, I realized that the situation was not something that we wanted to chase. Storms were HP related and they were moving north at 50 to 70 mph. I never saw storms move so fast in my life. These were certainly not something we wanted to be chasing. Not only would they be impossible to keep up with, but they would also be so rain-wrapped that you were asking for trouble.
We met in Hudson at about 3:30pm and decided to head west into the twin cities to sit the storm out at my place. Before we left Hudson we stopped at the rest area in Hudson and looked at the DTN radar they had there. We noticed some severe cells moving north. They had a bow echo look to them. So we decided to try to get to the edge of the storms and watch them go by.
As we headed west we got off of I-94 and onto 694. Looking to the south we could see some very ominous looking clouds. Structure was very obscured by rain, but the deep dark color to them told us we were in a bad spot. At about 4:30pm I decided we had to get out of the way. It was rush hour traffic and I decided to bypass it. I took the emergency lane aside the stopped traffic to get to some shelter.
I turned off on Rice Street in Shoreview. There was a gas station on the corner so I figured we could flee there. But before we took shelter I wanted to go down the road next to the gas station to try to get a look at what was behind the trees. As we got to a dead end the trees cleared out and we could see a thick tornado comming right across 694 moving right towards us. Tim looked behind us and saw yet another smaller tornado.
== http://www.aprweather.com/chase/shorview.htm
-----------------
This is what I call the past background. In such background, will the author use Present Perfect at all? Will anyone use AFTER TIM LEFT above? Can I lie to you in any way at all?
Then I searched exact match for "After Tim left", and clicked in THE FIRST ITEM OF THE FIRST RESULTING PAGE. This is what I saw:
-----------------
The Chessmen was introduced by WADO disk jockey Allen Fredericks, who helped them get gigs backing up doowop groups such as The Shirelles, The Crest, The Earl, and The Doves. The Chessmen were now playing New York City. With the advent of surf music which didn't have much sax, Tim Bogert then picked up the electric bass.
AFTER TIM LEFT high school, he was in and out of a number of bands in the NYC area. In 1965, he went on a lounge tour of the Eastern Seaboard with Rick Martin and the Showmen, where he met Mark Stein, the keyboardist and vocalist. The two of them hit it off, and they soon left to join with drummer Joey Brennan and guitarist Vince Martell to form their own band, The Pigeons. After recording an album called "While the World was Eating", they replaced drummer Joe Brennan with Carmine Appice and changed the name of the band to Vanilla Fudge.
A hoopla has been made about who actually came up with the name. Some attribute it to Shadow Morton. However, according to Tim, "I think it was Mark's cousin who came up with Vanilla Fudge. Everyone thought it had something to do with ' white soul ' because white boys were doing soul music. It had nothing to do with that, it had something to do with a nickname."
== http://www.timbogert.com/bogertb.htm
-----------------
This is a commentary. You will find present tenses (Simple Present or Present Perfect) in it. In short, it is a present background. Can I fool you in any way at all?
|