have/had and did

Status
Not open for further replies.

poornima21

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Member Type
Academic
Did is used when you are referring to an act in the past and their is no bearing of iot in teh present.
Have you done is a present perfect tense. you use it when the act which is completed in the past but it affects the current situation





i want to know how to use have/had and did...i am so confused....here are some examples:

did u do ur homework?
have u done ur homework?

what is the difference between the two sentences...
is it rite that we can use both in the same sense..
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
What I would say is that those of us who use both and think both are correct have a more balanced view on this topic.
That may be true. I guess people who say “I done me homework already” must be even more ‘balanced’ than either of us. That's a silly thing to say.
===
Of course it's silly. But it's a fitting reply to a rhetorical appeal to "balance". Using loaded terms like this is the type of thing that, creationists, say, do to get equal teaching with science. On the surface, it sounds only fair. Perhaps we should teach some incorrect grammar to "balance" the correct grammar? Is that silly? - sure!
Balance is a good thing if you get the balance right.

Anyhow, I've presented my case.
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
What I would say is that those of us who use both and think both are correct have a more balanced view on this topic.
That may be true. I guess people who say “I done me homework already” must be even more ‘balanced’ than either of us. That's a silly thing to say.
===
Of course it's silly. But it's a fitting reply to a rhetorical appeal to "balance". Using loaded terms like this is the type of thing that, creationists, say, do to get equal teaching with science. On the surface, it sounds only fair. Perhaps we should teach some incorrect grammar to "balance" the correct grammar? Is that silly? - sure!
Balance is a good thing if you get the balance right.

Anyhow, I've presented my case.
That's a pretty pathetic response! You are suggesting that I am the one trying to balance something because I have no legitimate answer to your points. You are the one who has no good answer.

Even though you admitted that it is silly to say that the simple past tense has no relevance to the present and you admitted that the simple past tense examples in this thread are not wrong, you stubbornly insist that simple past tense is "inherently inferior" to present perfect tense. (good reasons given...none)

But the main reason I am responding again is poor "poornima21". It's as if (her)(his) post was magically planted here to illustrate the very harmful effect on students that the 'only present perfect tense is right' tyranny has. (Her)(His) proper understanding of English may be set back for life.

The honest and honorable thing for you to do would have been to tell (her)(him) that (s)he is wrong in believing that simple past tense can only be used when there is no (bearing on)(relevance to) the present. Again I remind you that you admitted that.
 
Last edited:

cami30

New member
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
interesting topic!
You might be interested in what my grammar books say about the differences between present perfect and past simple. Since I am not a native speaker of English I am quite interested in finding the right answer.

So my books say that past simple is always used with definite time indicators (adverbs) such as yesterday , ago, last year, or you can use past tense when the time of the action ( the past time) can be seen from the context) Past tense simple has no connection with the present!
e.g.
I went to school yesteday/last year
I finished my homework last night/ at 9 pm ( it's 10 pm now)
It was a nice day yesterday. We went to school, we learnt a lot.. ( the past time can be seen from the context)

As for the present perfect my grammar books ( written by native speakers) say that present perfect is either connected with the present or it "has happened" within an indefinite period or time ( lately, just, recently, yet, these days, today) or within a period of time which is not mentioned but... we understand that the period covered is "until now". Present perfect started , developed and was completed in the past but has consequences in the present!
e.g
Have you done your homework? ( until now?) connected with the present
Did you do your homework yesterday? finished in the past no connection with the present

So according to the rules I should never say:
"My stomach hurts. I ate too much." but " My stomach hurts. I have eaten too much" ( the present consequence of too much food is that my stomach hurts.

Again, this is what grammarians say
Do you agree with my explanations?
 

Abstract Idea

Key Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Portuguese
Home Country
Brazil
Current Location
United States
interesting topic!
You might be interested in what my grammar books say about the differences between present perfect and past simple. Since I am not a native speaker of English I am quite interested in finding the right answer.

So my books say that past simple is always used with definite time indicators (adverbs) such as yesterday , ago, last year, or you can use past tense when the time of the action ( the past time) can be seen from the context) Past tense simple has no connection with the present!
e.g.
I went to school yesteday/last year
I finished my homework last night/ at 9 pm ( it's 10 pm now)
It was a nice day yesterday. We went to school, we learnt a lot.. ( the past time can be seen from the context)

As for the present perfect my grammar books ( written by native speakers) say that present perfect is either connected with the present or it "has happened" within an indefinite period or time ( lately, just, recently, yet, these days, today) or within a period of time which is not mentioned but... we understand that the period covered is "until now". Present perfect started , developed and was completed in the past but has consequences in the present!
e.g
Have you done your homework? ( until now?) connected with the present
Did you do your homework yesterday? finished in the past no connection with the present

So according to the rules I should never say:
"My stomach hurts. I ate too much." but " My stomach hurts. I have eaten too much" ( the present consequence of too much food is that my stomach hurts.

Again, this is what grammarians say
Do you agree with my explanations?

Before reading this thread I would say that I completely agree with your explanations cami30. But now ...

I think 2006 and Raymott are the ones to answer ...

(Or maybe they have already answered in the posts above and now it is up to us ...)
 

Abstract Idea

Key Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
Portuguese
Home Country
Brazil
Current Location
United States
Artificially constructed Simple Englishes have been tried in the past (were tried in the past?), but students want to know how we speak.
My argument is that the present perfect in this context is universally accepted as being correct, even if other variants could also be considered correct.

Do you think it is possible to imagine English without either present perfect tense or simple past? I am not asking about 'real English'. Could it be possible?
Either all simple past sentences would be expressed with present perfect ones or the other way round. (I guess there are other languages where the present perfect structure does not exist.)

Consider both sides and decide if one makes more sense than the other. And ask questions if necessary.

Do you have examples of constructions in English where only present perfect works, with simple past simply completely forbidden grammatically? (This maybe a silly question, but since it may be not, I must ask it)
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
Do you have examples of constructions in English where only present perfect works, with simple past simply completely forbidden grammatically? (This maybe a silly question, but since it may be not, I must ask it)
No, actually that's a good question and I am glad you asked it.
The answer is yes. Between present perfect and simple past, sometimes only perfect tense is correct.
Assume you started living in city X four years ago and you still live there.

I have lived in X for four years. :tick:
I lived in X for four years. :cross:

So maybe because sometimes only perfect tense is correct, at least some people think that always only perfect tense is correct. (at least when one is choosing between the two)

But in this thread, I have repeatedly noted that in the context of the OP's original question both are correct. (Did you do)(Have you done) your homework?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
cami30

If you read my posts, you will know that I don't agree with what those grammar books say. But that's apparently what followers of British English believe. (Actually even Raymott doesn't agree with everything in your post.)
So my advice to you would be that if you want to speak only British English, you might have to follow what those books say.

But in fact there is no good reason to make the statements that those grammar books do. There is nothing in the grammar or semantics of simple past tense that restricts the use of simple past in the way that, at least some, British speakers say simple past is restricted. The only answer I can think of is that they are so habituated to using present perfect that they have declared that only present perfect is correct in sentences like that in the OP.
If you want to speak North American English, you need not follow those grammar books. But remember that North American speakers use both tenses in sentences such as those in the OP.
 
Last edited:

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Do you think it is possible to imagine English without either present perfect tense or simple past?
Yes, it's possible to get by with one tense and the use of adverbs to signify time.
I go to school yesterday.
I go to school before I go to university long time ago.
I go to school after I go for swim tomorrow.

Pidgin languages use such reduced grammar.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
The honest and honorable thing for you to do would have been to tell (her)(him) that (s)he is wrong in believing that simple past tense can only be used when there is no (bearing on)(relevance to) the present. Again I remind you that you admitted that.
If you re-read my first post, #7, in which I agree with you, you'll see that that is consistent with what I told the OP.
This issue of the simple past having relevance to the present is your argument, and one that I agreed to as soon as you mentioned it.
 
Last edited:

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
Yes, it's possible to get by with one tense and the use of adverbs to signify time.
I go to school yesterday.
I go to school before I go to university long time ago.
I go to school after I go for swim tomorrow.

Pidgin languages use such reduced grammar.
I agree. (A far as I know) Chinese doesn't have past tense; it has 'markers' to indicate the action was (completed)(in the past). And it doesn't have anything resembling perfect tense.
 

2006

Key Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Member Type
Other
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
If you re-read my first post, #7, in which I agree with you, you'll see that that is consistent with what I told the OP.
This issue of the simple past having relevance to the present is your argument, and one that I agreed to as soon as you mentioned it.
Sorry, I was referring to poornima21's post, not to the OP. There was an opportunity for you to tell/remind (her)(him) that you don't agree with (her)(his) statement that simple past cannot be used when there is relevance to the present.
(S)he likely didn't completely read all the previous posts. And if I had told (her)(him) about simple past and
relevance, s(he) probably would be less likely to believe me considering the way (s)he seems to be leaning.
 
Last edited:

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Sorry, I was referring to poornima21's post, not to the OP. There was an opportunity for you to tell/remind (her)(him) that you don't agree with (her)(his) statement that simple past cannot be used when there is relevance to the present.
(S)he likely didn't completely read all the previous posts. And if I had told (her)(him) about simple past and
relevance, s(he) probably would be less likely to believe me considereing the way (s)he seems to be leaning.

My God, you’re right! I missed an opportinuty to tell a poster that they are wrong! That’s not like me at all.
But seriously, I’m sure I skimmed poornima21's post and gave it the attention I thought it warranted. It’s not my place to clean up after every poster who wants to take a stab at the answer without having bothered to read the thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top