There was once a beggar who had tried many ways to get money. At last he thought he would pretend to be dumb. Now one day a gentleman who had known the beggar by sight passed by. He went up to the beggar and asked him suddenly :“How long have you been dumb?” The beggar was taken by surprise and quite forgot that he was ‘dumb.’ He answered quickly :“Oh, ever since I was born,sir.”
*********
The underlined part, how about "knew the beggar by sight"? Is it also allowable?
Top answer
Yes; I like that much better. 'Had known' is wrong there: it indicates that the man no longer knew him by sight.
— Mister Micawber
Yes; I like that much better.
'Had known' is wrong there: it indicates that the man no longer knew him by sight.
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
Hi. I am somewhat not sure why "had known" indicating cessation of having known the beggar by sight is the only reading you can get. (I am not sure I wrote correctly to reflect what I wanted to say, though) Could we also read into it and derive an interpretation that says "he had known the beggar upto that 'one day' he passed by"?
'Had played'in past matches is fine; they are no longer playing. However, as I have already said, you cannot suddenly not 'know the beggar by sight'. The beggar looks no different now. Hence, no past perfect.
I feel that you figure that the "had known" is not incorrect there. You are saying that it is also an option. I guess you are saying that "had known" is used to indicate "the gentleman who had known the beggar up to that time". Have I understood you?
I see.... There was a reply by Mister Micawber... And I understand his explanation. There is a difference between doing some matches and knowing some one.