simple past-present perfect

Status
Not open for further replies.

ridvann

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Turkmen
Home Country
Turkmenistan
Current Location
Turkmenistan
I have seen a question about simple past ,and I want to ask a question too.
Does 'many years before' contain the same rule? I know that 'many years before' can be used with 'present perfect tense' ,but the simple past tense?

The idiom existed many years before the rock anthem. (It is correct)

But, if we will say in this way bellow?

-The idiom existed many years before.
or
-I saw that movie before. (I know that we can use it with present perfect tense)

Are they correct?
 

emsr2d2

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
I have seen a question about the simple past, and I want to ask a question too.
Does 'many years before' contain the same rule? I know that 'many years before' can be used with 'present perfect tense', but the simple past tense?

The idiom existed many years before the rock anthem. (It is correct)

But, if we will say in this way below?

-The idiom existed many years before.
or
-I saw that movie before. (I know that we can use it with present perfect tense)

Are they correct?

The idiom existed many years before ... needs to be followed by what it existed before.

I have seen this/that movie before = this is fine as a standalone sentence.

I saw that movie before I saw Jaws.

Please review your positioning of commas. They go immediately after a word, then there is a space, then the next word.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland

ridvann

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Turkmen
Home Country
Turkmenistan
Current Location
Turkmenistan
Oh...I have been so confused now. Can we use them as I wrote or not? :(
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
Oh...I have been so confused now. Can we use them as I wrote or not? :(
"The idiom existed many years before." This is OK IMO.
 

ridvann

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Turkmen
Home Country
Turkmenistan
Current Location
Turkmenistan
Thanks for answering ,but can't we use ''many years before'' with the simple past tense? Thanks a lot...
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
"The idiom existed many years before." This is OK IMO.
I don't feel that this can stand alone. I think it's acceptable here:

"R C Postule claims that the idiom was first recorded in a book published in 1743. (However) the idiom existed many years before.We have only to look at the 17th century folksong Woggling in the Grunge' to see..."

If it is not to be taken as meaning 'before now', there needs to be a time-reference point somewhere, in my opinion.
 

emsr2d2

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
I don't feel that this can stand alone. I think it's acceptable here:

"R C Postule claims that the idiom was first recorded in a book published in 1743. (However) the idiom existed many years before.We have only to look at the 17th century folksong Woggling in the Grunge' to see..."

If it is not to be taken as meaning 'before now', there needs to be a time-reference point somewhere, in my opinion.

Thanks 5jj. That's pretty much what I meant - that it couldn't stand completely alone. The simple addition of "However" in your version makes it perfectly acceptable, in my opinion too.
 

ridvann

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Turkmen
Home Country
Turkmenistan
Current Location
Turkmenistan
-"R C Postule claims that the idiom was first recorded in a book published in 1743. Actually, he tried to publish it too many times before .We have only to look at the 17th century folksong Woggling in the Grunge' to see..."

If we construct a sentence like that while mention about in past, I think we can use 'many times before' ,and it doesn't convey 'before now'. For this reason (in my opinion), we can use it with the simple past tense, but I would like you to help me and say please that I am wrong or not. Thanks...
 
Last edited:

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
-"R C Postule claims that the idiom was first recorded in a book published in 1743. Actually, he tried to publish it too many times before .We have only to look at the 17th century folksong Woggling in the Grunge' to see..."

If we construct a sentence like that while mentioning [STRIKE]about in[/STRIKE] the past, I think we can use 'many times before' ,and it doesn't convey 'before now'. For this reason (in my opinion), we can use it with the simple past tense, but I would like you to help me and say please [STRIKE]that[/STRIKE] whether I am wrong or not. Thanks...
Of course it does not mean 'before now'. It means 'before 1743'. That was precisely the point I was making in a previous post: If it is not to be taken as meaning 'before now', there needs to be a time-reference point somewhere, in my opinion.

We do not need the 'too'.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
There are quite a few similar examples in the BNC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top