[General] Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ago..?

[Zoli]

Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ago..?

[FONT=&quot]The text:

I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ago and it had a tremendous impact on my life.[/FONT]

 

[Zoli]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

If the book still has an impact on my life, should I use "it has had" instead?

 

[Tarheel]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

Either way is okay, but I think simple past is more natural.

 

[jutfrank]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

If the book still has an impact on my life, should I use "it has had" instead?

Yes, that's exactly right.

However, it's not very good to mix a past tense, which focuses on a past time (I read your book a few years ago) with a present tense, which is meant to focus on a present result (it has had a tremendous impact on my life) in the same sentence with a simple conjunction (and). You need to find a way to reconcile this mismatch.

 

[GoesStation]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

You need to find a way to reconcile this mismatch.

Hint: there's a very simple solution.

 

[Yankee]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

If the book still has an impact on my life, should I use "it has had" instead?

I would infer (with "had") that there was a single, specific instance that the book had on one's life. With "has had", the impact continues to be evident.

 

[Zoli]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

Yes, that's exactly right.

However, it's not very good to mix a past tense, which focuses on a past time (I read your book a few years ago) with a present tense, which is meant to focus on a present result (it has had a tremendous impact on my life) in the same sentence with a simple conjunction (and). You need to find a way to reconcile this mismatch.

I guess I should use the semicolon like so?

I read your book a few years ago; it had a tremendous impact on my life.

I thought that in [FONT=&quot]English the restrictions on the choice of tenses are normally more to do with what makes logical sense than with grammar rules.[/FONT]

 

[TheParser]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ago and it had a tremendous impact on my life.

NOT A TEACHER

If the book is still influencing your life, you might write a more concise sentence something like: "Your book Attitude is Everything has had a tremendous impact on my life."

(One assumes that you must have read it.)

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

The text:

I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ago, and it had a tremendous impact on my life.

Yes, it sounds natural. With a comma, it will look natural, too.

It's fine with has had, too, but that has a slightly different meaning. Without has, the book was a turning point. With has, the book is having a continuing effect.

 

[jutfrank]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

I guess I should use the semicolon like so?

I read your book a few years ago; it had a tremendous impact on my life.

You've used two past tenses there. I was talking about mixing the past simple with the present perfect.

I thought that in English the restrictions on the choice of tenses are normally more to do with what makes logical sense than with grammar rules.

I'm not sure what you mean. I didn't mention any grammar rules.

 

[Tarheel]

Re: Does this sound natural: I read your book "Attitude is Everything" a few years ag

Saying that something had a tremendous impact on your life pretty much implies that it was a lasting one, and it does not suggest that the effect has ceased to have meaning. Indeed, the opposite is true. If you no longer considered it relevant you probably wouldn't mention it at all.