Mr Zarqawi

Question

Militant leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was still alive  when Iraqi police got to the scene of the air strikes that targeted  him, the US military says. But the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq died of his wounds shortly afterwards, Major General William Caldwell said.  US planes dropped two 500lb (230kg) bombs on Zarqawi's safe house near the city of Baquba on Wednesday.  Zarqawi had tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police, Maj Gen Caldwell said.  "Everybody resecured him back onto the stretcher, but he  died almost immediately thereafter from the wounds he had received from  this air strike," he said.  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Now you are talking that Zarqawi was alive when the police arrived at the scene.2. He succumbed to his injuries.  This took place after the arrival of the police.3. Now you want to describe the events which took place after the bombing and after the ariival of police.My question is on the following past perfect aspects(11) Zarqawi had tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police.(12) "Everybody resecured him back onto the stretcher, but he  died almost immediately thereafter from the wounds he had received from  this air strike," he said.Wouldn't you write the  following sentences instead of the above? Because I can't perceive why  it is necessary to write the past perfect in the given context.(13) Zarqawi tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police.(14) "Everybody resecured him back onto the stretcher, but he  died almost immediately thereafter from the wounds he received from  this air strike," he said.

Marius Hancu · Accepted Answer

You have a point here:

(13) Zarqawi tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police.
could work, but it was the writer's choice to place both the events of

being placed on the stretcher
trying to move off the stretcher

before the event of
securing him back on the stretcher
and in past perfect.

It's a matter of writer's choice, how much he/she places in one tense or another, while trying to instill in the reader a feeling for the time sequence.

There are no absolutes here.

This is no physics, it's writing, much more relative.

Also the original was alive could/should have been had been alive inside the article, but the writer didn't use the past perfect there, because this is the title, which is less strict and simplified, and contains less temporal order, as not many references to various events can be made in it.

Also, sometimes the writers decide to introduce strict temporal order only in parts of the story.

In this case, the more rigorous part is:

Zarqawi had tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police, Maj Gen Caldwell said.
"Everybody resecured him back onto the stretcher, but he died almost immediately thereafter from the wounds he had received from this air strike," he said.

because the author wanted to quote the general as strictly/exactly as possible.

Clive · Answer

Hi Rotter,

At this point, my suggestion is that you might learn more about the use of Past Perfect if you try to write sentences yourself in which you use it. If you do that and then post them here, we can give you comments and advice.

It's good to study other people's writing, as you have been doing, but at some point you have to learn by trying it yourself. That's the method that I use with my class.

Anyway, whatever approach you decide to take, we're happy to try to help you.

Best wishes again, Clive

Rotter · Answer

Thanks Clive

Would you agree with the comments made by Marius?

Clive · Answer

Hi,

Yes, I agree that in cases where both tenses are possible, it becomes a matter of style and choice.

However, as I think we've discussed before, there are situations where clarity requires the Past Perfect.

Best wishes, Clive

Ant_222 · Answer

«Militant leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was still alive when Iraqi police got to the scene of the air strikes that targeted him, the US military says.»

I don't agree with Marius that «was still alive» can/should be relaced by «had been still alive». Marius said that Past Simple here was used only because it's a title.

I think, Past Perfect would be absolutely incorrect here. At some past moment (when the police arrived at the scene of the air strike) Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was alive. I see no reasons for Past Perfect here. So, the «temporal order» in this sentece is quite strict and clear, without Past Perfect.

The same structuire: «When I arrived, it was evening.» — No Past Perfect.

«Zarqawi had tried to move off the stretcher where he had been placed by Iraqi police.»

About this I don't agree with Marius too. It seems to me that this action took place before the bombing (Marios gave a different explanation why Past Perfect was used here), thus expressed in the Past Perfect. Therefore, I think Past Perfect is necessary here. If it had been written in Past Simple, it would seem that this action took place after the air strike.

Marius compared the moment of this action to the moment of a later action, which was described in text below. But these two actions form normal sequence, as in

«I woke up, got off the bed and dressed.»

How can this be a reason for the Past Perfect?

So, I think the real reason is the precedence of this action to the bombong.

«(12) "Everybody resecured him back onto the stretcher, but he died almost immediately thereafter from the wounds he had received from this air strike," he said.»

It's a quotation, a part of another context. It has no direct connection with the sequence of actions in this story. In quotation the words of a person are written withot any changes.

As for «...he had received...», it's in the Past Perfect, because he had been wounded before he died, while in the quotation these actions are refferred to in the reverse order.

Of course, Marius is much more experinced than I, so let's wait for his and others' comments.

Rotter · Answer

I see the opinion differs on how to use the past perfect.

Clive wants my own examples.

This morning I went to town.

1. First I went to the gym and trained for 90 minutes.

2. Afterwards, I went to a shop and bought two trousers which is suitable to wear in summer. They were very cheap. That is why I bought two of them.

3.I went to the gym for training this morning and bought two pairs of trousers on my way back home. As I didn't have any money in my wallet, I had withdrawn some money from a cash dispenser to buy the trousers.

Is the third sentence fine?

Marius Hancu · Answer

Rotter 1. First I went to the gym and trained for 90 minutes.

2. Afterwards, I went to a shop and bought two trousers which is
suitable to wear in summer. They were very cheap. That is why I bought
two of them.

3.I went to the gym for training this morning and bought two pairs of
trousers on my way back home. As I didn't have any money in my wallet,
I had withdrawn some money from a cash dispenser to buy the trousers.

I understand 3 is a rephrasing of 1+2, using the past perfect.

3 isn't bad. However, in order for 3 to be correct while using the past perfect, some
changes should be introduced:

3. I went to the gym for training this morning and bought two pairs of
trousers on my way back home; just before that, I had withdrawn some
money from a cash dispenser [ you may want to continue with: as I had
been left with no cash].

The just before that introduces the temporal information which
indicates that the past perfect is required in order to correctly
represent the order of events.

If such information weren't present, we would/could have a flat
representation of events, all in past tense.

Marius Hancu · Answer

Just to clarify:

Militant leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was still alive when Iraqi police
got to the scene of the air strikes that targeted him, the US military
says.

This is the title of the article, the way I read it.

I would not suggest changing a title to past perfect, as the time
relationships required for past perfect can't be fully described in a
short sentence. Also, the past perfect might seem pretentious in a title.

However, if this were in the body of the article, and with a different/clarifying
context, it might/could be changed to past perfect.

Rotter · Answer

Thankd Marius for the replies.  The past perfect is tricky.

Mr Zarqawi

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions