Not until

[Tdol]

[nicolas]

Dear All,

Not until did he arrive home he found he'd left it in the restaurant.
Not until he arrived home did he find he'd left it in the restaurant.

^^!! This is too difficult for me.
I can't understand what it exactly means. :(

Is this what it means?
He did not find that he had left it in the restaurant until he arrived home.


When will we use this sentence pattern?
Why do we use this sentence pattern?

Thanks !

[Casiopea]

It was't until he had arrived home that he found he'd left it in the restuarant. :D

Event 1: he arrived home => past perfect "he had arrived home"
Event 2: he found => simple past "he found"

Event 1: He left it in the restuarant => past perfect "he'd left it"
Event 2: He found it out => simple past "he found" it out.

:D my brain hurts :D

[nicolas]

Dear Casiopea,

Not until did he arrive home he found he'd left it in the restaurant.
Not until he arrived home did he find he'd left it in the restaurant.

So it means that:
(It was) not till he had arrived home that he found he had left it in the restaurant.


So he was on the way home.
And maybe he was driving, suddenly he found that he had left sth in the restaurant.
Is it right?


Why do we put auxiliary verb "did" there?
Not until he arrived home did he find he'd left it in the restaurant.
( the 2nd sentence is correct, isn't it? )

When would we put auxiliary verb in that position?
(I think this sentence is a little like
No sooner had I left the house than it started raining.)

When and Why?

Thanks!

[RonBee]

Yes, he drove all the way home, then after he got home (inside the house) he realized he had left the item at the restaurant. Thus, it was not until (after) he arrived home, etc.

(Cassie is somewhat better at the grammar stuff, so I'll let her answer that part of your question.)



:)

[Casiopea]

Why do we put auxiliary verb "did" there?
Not until he arrived home did he find he'd left it in the restaurant.
( the 2nd sentence is correct, isn't it? )

Yes. The 2nd part, "did he find he'd left..." is OK. :D

he did (in fact) find.... (did refers to 'it's a fact'; used for emphasis)

When would we put auxiliary verb in that position? When and Why?

did he (in fact) find.... (did is moved to the verb position)

Not until X verb Y
X = he had arrived home
Y = he find he had left the key....

If we add a verb, then 'did' becomes ungrammatical:

It was not until he had arrived home did he find.... Ungrammatical

:D

By the way, the original sentence is not grammatical to me. I prefer:

Not until he had arrived home did he find he had left....

:D

[nicolas]

Wow! Thank you so much :D

But I still have a questions

Not until he had arrived home did he find he had left....

he drove all the way home, then after he got home (inside the house)

What's the different between "Not until he had arrived home ... " and "until he had arrived home ..."?

If we say
"I'll stay here until 9:00 pm." --- The action (stay) will continue to 9:00 pm
"I'll stay here not until 9:00 pm" --- The action (stay) will not continue to 9:00 pm

So how to explain "not until he had arrived home did he find he had left ..."?
Why did he already get home and inside the house?

The action (he find he had left the item at the restaurant) will not continue to he had arrived home.
So before he arrived home, he should know he left sth at the restaurant ?

[RonBee]

What's the different between "Not until he had arrived home ... " and "until he had arrived home ..."?

The first one is used; the other one isn't. Thus, it is not an apt comparison.

If we say
"I'll stay here until 9:00 pm." --- The action (stay) will continue to 9:00 pm
"I'll stay here not until 9:00 pm" --- The action (stay) will not continue to 9:00 pm

The second one is not used. You might say, "I won't stay here until 9:00pm" with the same meaning.

So how to explain "not until he had arrived home did he find he had left ..."?
Why did he already get home and inside the house?

Althoiugh the item was at the restaurant during the entire drive home, it was not until (not before) he arrived at the house that he remembered leaving it there. (Did I explain that adequately?)

The action (he find he had left the item at the restaurant) will not continue to he had arrived home.
So before he arrived home, he should know he left sth at the restaurant ?

The action (remembering that he had left the item at the restaurant) happens after he arrives at his house. The item was at the restaurant the whole time, but he didn't remember it before then. The remembering happened after he got home.

:)

[Casiopea]

There's also,

If I had have know => Had I have known...

wherein 'had' replaces 'if'.

:D

[nicolas]

Dear RonBee and Casiopea,

Wow! Very explicit answers!

I think I have understanded this sentence more.



Thanks :D