0
Anonymous Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Sequence of tenses
Which of the following has the correct sequence of tenses?
HAVING MET with one king, two presidents, four prime ministers, the delegation HAS RETURNED to the United States with an up-to-date, comprehensive assessment of regional dynamics.
HAVING MET with one king, two presidents, four prime ministers, the delegation RETURNED to the United States with an up-to-date, comprehensive assessment of regional dynamics.
HAVING MET with one king, two presidents, four prime ministers, the delegation HAS RETURNED to the United States with an up-to-date, comprehensive assessment of regional dynamics.
HAVING MET with one king, two presidents, four prime ministers, the delegation RETURNED to the United States with an up-to-date, comprehensive assessment of regional dynamics.
Top answer
The non-finite "having met" will precede the main (finite) verb in time, so both sentences work equally well. The simple past event could have happened 200 years ago. The present perfect event would be fairly recent.
- The non-finite "having met" will precede the main (finite) verb in time, so both sentences work equally well.
- The simple past event could have happened 200 years ago.
- The present perfect event would be fairly recent.
- "
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
The non-finite "having met" will precede the main (finite) verb in time, so both sentences work equally well.
The simple past event could have happened 200 years ago. The present perfect event would be fairly recent.
If these are your sentences, I suggest "and four prime ministers."
The simple past event could have happened 200 years ago. The present perfect event would be fairly recent.
If these are your sentences, I suggest "and four prime ministers."
00
Related Questions