- 1 Post By grammarfreak
Having plus past participle and perfect tenses.
Dear teachers :
* This is the second part of two, regarding what it was written in the first one.
This is my understanding regarding the expositions I just wrote in the previous thread (first part), I want you to tell me in which points I am not right or I am wrong, please, make your respective comment and assistance, which will be appreciated as it has always been.
a) Here the past action that occurs before the other one is in the clause containing having plus past participle, sometimes lacking of a subject, but the actions being performed by one subject. These actions may happen one after another or not, there is a cause and a result action in the sentence, but cannot be interchanged each other as in past perfect.
Having studied english, I started to learn french.
After I had finished studying english, I started to learn french. (If I had finished in december and started in january, the actions were not one after another, )
Having rung the bell, the students began the class.
After the bell had rung, the students began the class. (The actions were one after another)
Having written the letters, I did some gardening.
When I had written the letters, I did some gardening ( The actions may be one after another or not )
b) As I stated before the past perfect action is the first happening prior to the other and the completed one in the past, may also be interchaged with the simple past action as well :
I had eaten everything in the house when my little brother got home, or
When by little brother got home, I had eaten everything in the house.
It means that when my little brother got home ( past event) I had eaten everything in the house ( past event that ocurred earlier than the previous one )
c) Finally, the gerund phrases were changed into a past participle preceded by the auxiliary verb have in the gerund form, thus becoming into a perfect participle, and then changed into a present perfect sentence. Present perfect is an action that happens in the past with a strong connection in the present. It connects an event in the past with the present and it is used to explain that something in the past matters now and may happen again.
Working for an attorney was a valuable experience.
1) The gerund phrase is working for an attorney
2) The gerund working is the subject of the verb ( was)
Having worked for an attorney, it was a valuable experience.
1) The gerund working took the past participle form (worked) preceded by the auxiliary verb (have).
2) The auxiliary verb (have) took the '' ing '' gerund form becoming in having.
I have worked for an attorney , that was a valuable experience.
1) I have worked for an attorney (past action)
2) That was a valuable experience (action that matters now in the present)
I hope for your comment and help in this matter.
Last edited by grammarfreak; 07-Feb-2013 at 19:36.
By grammarfreak in forum Ask a Teacher
Last Post: 13-Dec-2012, 04:25
By Thomas_1979 in forum Ask a Teacher
Last Post: 26-Aug-2012, 16:11
By Marybeth in forum Ask a Teacher
Last Post: 01-Jan-2010, 08:36
By isahne in forum Ask a Teacher
Last Post: 18-Apr-2006, 18:18
By lyfen in forum Ask a Teacher
Last Post: 03-Nov-2005, 18:19
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO