Had produced/used to produce
Does "had produced" in the following text imply "used to produce"?
Text:
The circumstances surrounding Warhol’s involvement with Absolut are recorded anecdotally as the outcome of a dinner conversation between the artist and Michael Roux, President of Carillon, the American import company that handles Absolut. Roux had already met Warhol and had already commissioned an artwork from him that depicted another Carillon beverage, La Grande Passion. According to Roux, it was Warhol that suggested taking the Absolut bottle as a subject for a painting which seems, in its more decorative, hand-crafted illustrative style, to hark back to the commercial work that Warhol had produced as an illustrator in the 1950s.
Top answer
catttt Does "had produced" in the following text imply "used to produce"? When we take "used to" in its usual meaning, we mean by it that Warhol no longer produced such commercial work after that period in the 1950s. If that's true, then 'had produced' and 'used to produce' are equivalent per accidens , but regardless, there is no implication as such.
- catttt Does "had produced" in the following text imply "used to produce"?
- When we take "used to" in its usual meaning, we mean by it that Warhol no longer produced such commercial work after that period in the 1950s.
- If that's true, then 'had produced' and 'used to produce' are equivalent per accidens , but regardless, there is no implication as such.
- CJ
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
cattttDoes "had produced" in the following text imply "used to produce"?
When we take "used to" in its usual meaning, we mean by it that Warhol no longer produced such commercial work after that period in the 1950s.
If that's true, then 'had produced' and 'used to produce' are equivalent per accidens, but regardless, there is no implication
0
Related Questions