Before the ambulance arrived, the injured man died/had died.
I think both verbs can be used. Am I correct?
Thanks.
Printable View
Before the ambulance arrived, the injured man died/had died.
I think both verbs can be used. Am I correct?
Thanks.
They can, but I vote for simple past.
With the use of "before" there is no doubt what happened in what order.
"Had died" is possible if the context calls for it. There's nothing in this sentence that suggests a need for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tan Elaine
However:
"As the ambulance approached the scene, the driver noticed that no one at all was attending to the injured man. This was because, before the ambulance arrived, the injured man had died."
"No one was looking after the injured man, because he had died."
I vote for "had died", because in Hong Kong if you use just "died" and you say you're really good at American English, the teacher will just put in "had" before died anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tan Elaine
I believe many non-native English teachers will put in 'had' before 'died', but I don't know the reason for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishman
Because the sequence is clear without it.
The reason is that many non-native teachers are taught, and teach, that two events happening at different times in the past require the earlier event to be phrased in the past perfect. It may even be normal in Hong Kong English. But it's not a rule for English elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tan Elaine
Examples like this are always going to occur where teachers who don't know the language teach the language - and there's no easy solution to that. No doubt, that's part of the reason for regional variation.