Hi euncu,
I just want to assure you that the problem with my understanding your point was not in your communication. You referred to the "second part" and I made an assumption about what you were talking about, focused only on the "there" instead of the tense.
I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.
Thank you for the answer.
As you can see in my latest post, I am now enquiring about something else. Is the way of thinking in my first post correct? I mean, if I walk past a shop, can I refer to the shop as "The past is an expensive shop" ?
Thanks for your answer in advance.
It's not a very natural way to talk.
We just passed a foreign land.
We've passed by an expensive shop.
You could still use it a bit metaphorically: That foreign land is our past. Now that we are back home, this is our present.
I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.
Thanks again for your answer.
Ok, no more questions but this last one (on this thread of course), as I understand it, there is no such thing as ;
Or, it just sounds unnatural although it makes sense in English. (At least, the sense I meant in the very first place). To prevent any misunderstanding I should add (or I should have add that in my first post on this thread) that by saying past I'm referring to an action (namely, moving past), I am, by no means, talking about the past times, past events.
Thanks for your answer in advance. (I'm sorry that I had you obliged to read this sentence over and over again)
I can't even say that it makes sense in English.
I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.