Perfect Aspect--Time Sequence

Question

Hi,

to show that something happened before the present perfect, do we use the past simple or past perfect? Why?

a) I have moved to Mississippi because I had been called so many names in California.

b) I have moved to Mississippi because I was called so many names in California.

c) I had been called so many names when I was living in N.Y. I am glad I have moved to Mississippi.

d) I was called so many names when I was living in N.Y. I am glad I have moved to Mississippi.

e) He has run the whole race (five times) because you had told him that he must.

f) He has run the whole race (five times) because you told him that he must.

Thanks

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

Good question. Does anything ever happen before the present perfect? I don't believe it does. Things happen before the past, though.

I moved to M. because I [had been / was (being)] called names.
He ran the race five times because you (had) told him to.

CJ

English 1b3 · Answer

Sorry and thank you, CJ

I must be slower than usual this morning because I couldn't really understand your answer.

I realise the past perfect is used to show something happening before the past simple.

CalifJimDoes anything ever happen before the present perfect? I don't believe it does

Why not? Because it is an indefinite time in the past?

So what tense do we use in the verbs following the present perfect in my sentences then?

CalifJim · Answer

English 1b3what tense do we use

I don't think you can use any tense.

I haven't thought about it a lot, and I haven't researched it, and I've never noticed it before, but I don't think you can use abecause clause after a main clause in the present perfect! Maybe the because clause fixes the time somehow, making it incompatible with a present perfect.

I'll think about it some more.
__________________

OK. I'm back. I tried to get some ideas by doing some Google searching.

Absolutely top choice is present tense in the because clause.

I've tried to contact them because they manufacture in the USA.
I've switched because I think the results are superior.
I've forgiven because I know he feels badly about it.
I've resisted because on-line chats are not my thing.
I've hung around because I'm an independent sort of cuss.
I've disengaged because I don't fit in and never will.
I've persevered because I'm stubborn.
__________________________

Second choice is present perfect.

I've succeeded because I haven't tried to sell anything.
I've neglected those things because I've been too busy.
I've suffered because I've been defined by my looks.
___________________________

I noticed a couple of cases of "couldn't". In my opinion, the main clause should have been in the simple past.

I've failed because I couldn't keep up with the course work.

Scattered among the examples, I also found a few (very few) uses of the simple past, usually was or were, but they didn't sound particularly idiomatic to my ear.

So I'd say that the answer to your question "Which tense goes after the present perfect?" is "the present tense or, less often, another present perfect".

I don't know if this applies only to because clauses or to any type of clause, but I suspect it's more general than just because clauses.

CJ

English 1b3 · Answer

CalifJimI don't think you can use any tense

Sorry for not understanding yet again. What do you mean? I just can't understand why we can't express a time before the present perfect. I mean, in my sentences (maybe not the because clause), the actions definitely precede the present perfect action in time.

CalifJim · Answer

English 1b3What do you mean?

Well, as corrected by my notes later in the post, you can use the present or the present perfect.

English 1b3I just can't understand why we can't express a time before the present perfect.

I would try to explain it by saying that the present perfect can't (=doesn't) express a (definite) time (in the past) at all. It does seem strange, I suppose.

CJ

English 1b3 · Answer

OK, I think I get ya--you're saying that we can't express that an action happens before the present perfect in time, because the present perfect is an indefinite time period.

By the way, before posting this thread, I posted basically the same question (Shhh, don't tell one

) and received an answer from MM.

His answer was that because the present perfect is a present tense form, the past simple should be used, not the past perfect (to show an event occuring before the action/state of the present perfect verb). Any thoughts on this interpretation?

Thanks again.

Perfect Aspect--Time Sequence

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions