When the Sun <rose> <had risen>, he was gone.

[Michaelll]

Is there any difference between these two? If there is, what is it?

When the Sun rose, he was gone.
When the Sun had risen, he was gone.

 

[5jj]

The second is not natural.

 

[Ms. Worth]

I think neither sentence is ideal.

When the Sun rose, he was gone.

> Does this mean "When the sun rose, we discovered that he was gone."?
That's how to express that idea.

When the Sun had risen, he was gone.

> Does this mean "By the time the sun had risen, he was gone." ?
You need this past perfect to express the sequence of events.

If neither of my suggestions meets the mark, can you elaborate on just what you'd like to say?

The word "sun" doesn't begin with an upper-case "s".

 

[Tarheel]

He was gone before dawn.

 

[Ms. Worth]

I think neither sentence is ideal.


> Does this mean "When the sun rose, we discovered that he was gone."?
That's how to express that idea.


> Does this mean "By the time the sun had risen, he was gone." ?
You need this past perfect to express the sequence of events.

If neither of my suggestions meets the mark, can you elaborate on just what you'd like to say?

The word "sun" doesn't begin with an upper-case "s".

I used to know how to indicate quoting a question I am responding to, but I forget.
Can you show me how to do it?

 

[emsr2d2]

I used to know how to indicate quoting a question I am responding to, but I forget.
Can you show me how to do it?

You've just done it. Instead of starting to type your reply straight into an empty text box, hit "Reply" to the bottom right of the post you want to quote. You can then edit the text inside the text box, removing anything that isn't relevant to your response. Then, as you did in post 5, type your response under the quote box.

 

[Ms. Worth]

He was gone before dawn.

That's a good option, but it lacks some of the edge of "by the time the sun was up."

On the other hand, as Elvis said:

Well she's gone, gone, gone
Yes, she's gone, gone, gone
Came the dawn, dawn, dawn, and my love was gone
But before that dawn, yes, before that dawn and before that dawn
Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh
Such a night
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdz_7uH8T0o

 

[Michaelll]

If neither of my suggestions meets the mark, can you elaborate on just what you'd like to say?

I found this sentence (in the past simple) in an American movie, and I don't know what they wanted to say here. I'm just trying to understand if that sentence shows 'simultaneous' or 'consecutive' actions (= the sequence of events). Does 'when' in this sentence mean 'after the Sun rose (consecutive)' or 'while the Sun rose (simultaneous)'?

When the Sun rose, he was gone. (simultaneous or consecutive? Is this 'while' or 'after'?)
When the Sun had risen, he was gone. (consecutive)

When an hour passed, I went home. (simultaneous or consecutive? Is this 'while' or 'after'?)
When an hour had passed, I went home. (consecutive)

 

[5jj]

When the Sun rose, he was gone. This has two possible meanings;
1. at the time of the rising of the sun, he was no longer there.
2. at the moment the sun appeared over the horizon, he departed.

When the Sun had risen, he was gone. This is not natural.

When an hour passed, I went home. This is not natural.

When an hour had passed, I went home. I left for home after one hour.

 

[Michaelll]

When an hour passed, I went home. This is not natural.

When an hour had passed, I went home. I left for home after one hour.

Thank you very much! I think I got it now.

"when an hour had passed" means "after an hour passed", while "when an hour passed" means "while/as an hour went on", right?

• Leonardo finally finished The Last Supper in 1498. It was one of the greatest paintings of the Renaissance. When he painted The Last Supper, he worked in a different way from most painters, and he made the paint in a different way too.

 

[5jj]

"When an hour had passed" means "after an hour passed",

Yes.

while "when an hour passed" means "while/as an hour went on", right?

Not necessarily.

• Leonardo finally finished The Last Supper in 1498. It was one of the greatest paintings of the Renaissance. When he painted The Last Supper, he worked in a different way from most painters, and he made the paint in a different way too.

That works.

 

[Michaelll]

• Leonardo finally finished The Last Supper in 1498. It was one of the greatest paintings of the Renaissance.
  When he painted The Last Supper, he worked in a different way from most painters, and he made the paint in a different way too.

That works.

I think that works because his working happened throughout the entire action of painting, so we don't have to use the past continuous here (When he was painting...), right?

So I'd like to ask you, does the sentence below work with the verb 'return' in the past simple or should it be in the past continuous?
My idea is to show that the pain in 'my' stomach happened throughout the entire action of returning to (a city).

• When I returned to Kaliningrad by train/on the train(?), I had stomach pains / I suffered from abdominal pain.

 

[Tarheel]

• Leonardo finally finished The Last Supper in 1498. It was one of the greatest paintings of the Renaissance. When he painted The Last Supper, he worked in a different way from most painters, and he made the paint in a different way too.

Who wrote that? Why use the word "finally"?

 

[Michaelll]

Who wrote that? Why use the word "finally"?

Do you think something in that text is ungrammatical? Perhaps for you it depends on who wrote it. It's from an adaptive book for English language learners by Cambridge University Press.

 

[Tarheel]

@Michaelll I don't know why the word "finally" is in that sentence. That was the reason for the question.

 

[Ms. Worth]

• Leonardo finally finished The Last Supper in 1498. It was one of the greatest paintings of the Renaissance.
  When he painted The Last Supper, he worked in a different way from most painters, and he made the paint in a different way too.

I think that works because his working happened throughout the entire action of painting, so we don't have to use the past continuous here (When he was painting...), right?

So I'd like to ask you, does the sentence below work with the verb 'return' in the past simple or should it be in the past continuous?
My idea is to show that the pain in 'my' stomach happened throughout the entire action of returning to (a city).

• When I returned to Kaliningrad by train/on the train(?), I had stomach pains / I suffered from abdominal pain.

To express this event so specifically, I think it would be better to simply re-phrase the sentence to highlight that timeline.
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I was on the train returning to the city..

You can stress different aspects of the trip by placing the important part last.

1) This phrasing highlights the train travel:
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I returned to the city by train.

2) This phrasing stresses the problem:
> The entire time I was on the train returning to the city, I suffered from abdominal problems..

 

[Michaelll]

To express this event so specifically, I think it would be better to simple re-phrase the sentence too highlight that timeline.
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I was on the train returning to the city..

You can stress different aspects of the trip by placing the important part last.

1) This phrasing highlights the train travel:
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I returned to the city by train.

2) This phrasing stresses the problem:
> The entire time I was on the train returning to the city, I suffered from abdominal problems..

Very, very helpful! Thank you very much!

May I ask, what do you think of these three?

1. When I returned to Kaliningrad by train, I suffered from abdominal pains.
2. When I was returning to Kaliningrad by train, I was suffering from abdominal pains. (I think this one is what most (if not all) Russians would say when translating)
3. When I was returning to Kaliningrad by train, I suffered from abdominal pains.

 

[Ms. Worth]

1. When I returned to Kaliningrad by train, I suffered from abdominal pains.
   This one means that you got sick after your return,
   
   
2. When I was returning to Kaliningrad by train, I was suffering from abdominal pains. (I think this one is what most (if not all) Russians would say when translating)
   This one means that you were sick during the return trip.
   
   
3. When I was returning to Kaliningrad by train, I suffered from abdominal pains.
   This is the same as the second sentence. There is a difference, and a native speaker would choose one instead of the other, but the difference is elusive and disappears when examined.
   I think a native reader would not be able to quote which one you used even 5 minutes after reading it.

 

[Michaelll]

Thank you!

1. When I returned to Kaliningrad by train, I suffered from abdominal pains.
   This one means that you got sick after your return,

Yeah, I feel the same. That's why I had thought the past continuous was better in the 'return' clause until you wrote this sentence:

1) This phrasing highlights the train travel:
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I returned to the city by train.

Here, as far as I understand, the past simple 'return' clause doesn't mean that 'I' got sick after 'my' return, even though we're using the past simple here, right?

 

[Ms. Worth]

Thank you!

Yeah, I feel the same. That's why I had thought the past continuous is better in the 'return' clause until you wrote this sentence:

Here, as far as I understand, the past simple 'return' clause doesn't mean that 'I' got sick after 'my' return, even though we're using the past simple here, right?

Yes. On re-reading my suggested sentence, I prefer
> I suffered from abdominal pains the entire time I was returning to the city by train.