I've always been taught "just" has to be followed by a present perfect. But I've just read a sentence in which it is followed by a preterite: "His name just came out of the Gobelet of Fire". Is it correct, and if it is, in which cases can I use it? Thanks!
Top answer
'I've just read a sentence'-- this means 'in the immediate past'. 'His name just came out of the Goblet of Fire'-- 'in the immediate past'. m.
— Mister Micawber
'I've just read a sentence'-- this means 'in the immediate past'.
'His name just came out of the Goblet of Fire'-- 'in the immediate past'.
m.
m.
tomorrow).
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.
'I've just read a sentence'-- this means 'in the immediate past'. 'His name just came out of the Goblet of Fire'-- 'in the immediate past'. 'At 6 a.m. tomorrow morning, I will have just awakened'-- the immediate past (from 6 a.m. tomorrow). 'I had just awakened when I heard a scream'-- ditto. 'Where's Jim? I just called his home, but he's not there.' -- ditto. 'What are
No, Pieanne, changing the name from "preterite" to "simple past" did not cause any of the usages of that form to change. It's still our old friend, but with an alternate name.
I learned it the same way, pieanne did - and all my grammar books also say that "just" is a signal word for perfect tenses ---> at least in British English. Americn English tends to use "just" with the Simple Past.
"Preterite" btw is applicable to English as well as for every Germanic language to refer to the Simple Past, even though the term "Simple Past indeed should be p