Swimming

Normally this would indicate that you had finished swimming. You would say "I was swimming when she arrived" to indicate that you were still in the water. However, if you said something like "I had been swimming for an hour when she arrived" it would indicate that you were still swimming when she got there.

"before her arriving was done" appears to mean "before she finished arriving", which is odd because "arriving" is normally seen as an instantaneous action.

From the viewpoint of now, say "I was swimming when she arrived".

"I had been swimming when she arrived" requires a viewpoint in the past, e.g. "I had been swimming when she arrived, but now, an hour later, I was sipping a coc

I had swum for an hour when she arrived.
Is this correct?

AnonymousI had swum for an hour when she arrived.Is this correct?

Yes, grammatically, but it's a very unlikely thing to say. I'm not even sure what it's supposed to mean.

Maybe with "already": I had already swum an hour when she arrived. It sounds like you planned to swim for a greater amount of time. She arrived before you had finished swi

I had been swimming for an hour when she arrived.
I think it indicates that my swimming had finished few minutes ago before her arrival.

Am I right?

AnonymousI had been swimming for an hour when she arrived.
I think it indicates that my swimming had finished few minutes ago before her arrival.

No. The sentence is quite silent on that matter.

I might still be in the pool.
I might have just stepped out of the pool.
I might have stepped out the pool, dried myself off, and dressed.

AnonymousI think it indicates that my swimming had finished few minutes ago before her arrival.Am I right?

No, you cannot make that definitive conclusion. (Cross-posted)

Hey, Anon. You have been posting a lot of random sentences with the past perfect.
Most of them have been either unnatural English, or you have drawn unwarranted conclusions.

I have trouble understanding past perfect progressive.
I hope someone can make it more clear to me.

AnonymousI have trouble understanding past perfect progressive.I hope someone can make it more clear to me.

The good news is that it is one of the least used tenses.

I wonder if it's the perfect part or the progressive part that mystifies you. It seems to me that you may be trying too hard to find precise meanings where there are none. That is, it's

I'm confuse with the progressive part.

As far as I understand past perfect progressive is that it's used to describe an action happening before another action. Also, it's used to show that the first action lasted for a long time but it was finished before the second action happened.
The strangest thing I hear about past perfect progressive may still is that it's often used to indicat