Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. keannu's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Dec 2010
    • Posts: 5,226
    #1

    non-infuential past perfect

    In my grammar book, these two past perfect are claimed to have happened prior to a past point, not affecting it.
    But doesn't "had eaten" afffect "food poisoning"? I don't know what is the standard to tell past perfect(influential up to a past point) like 3 from past perfect(non-influential up to a past point) like 1 and 2.

    gz40
    1. I got food poisoning yesterday because of the food that I had eaten the day before yesterday.(separated from the past point of food poisoning)
    2. After I had taken some medicine, I felt a lot better. (separated from the past point of "felt a lot better")

    3. Steve had never been abroad before he went to the university.(affecting until "he went to the university")

  2. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,221
    #2

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    I can't imagine why your grammar book says that further-in-the-past action doesn't affect the more-recent-in-the-past action.

    You should ignore that.

    Of course the act of eating the contaminated food is the cause of the food poisoning.
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

  3. keannu's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Dec 2010
    • Posts: 5,226
    #3

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Thanks a lot! But the actual explanation is that 1,2 are the ones where further-in-the-past action shoud be divided(separated) from the more-recent-in-the-past action. I wonder if native speakers have the notion to divide 1,2 from 3.
    Do you think there's two kinds in past perfect or no?

    ***Maybe the grammar book deals with the following that I found on the internet, it refers to a specific time that doesn't seem to affect or be related to the more recent one. So I wonder if I need to separate this from the normal past perfect as the grammar book defines.

    http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html
    IMPORTANT Specific Times with the Past Perfect


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	simplepastspecific.gif 
Views:	1 
Size:	788 Bytes 
ID:	1412

    Unlike with the Present Perfect, it is possible to use specific time words or phrases with the Past Perfect. Although this is possible, it is usually not necessary.
    Example:

    • She had visited her Japanese relatives once in 1993 before she moved in with them in 1996.
    Last edited by keannu; 29-Sep-2012 at 00:30.

  4. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,221
    #4

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    I'm sorry, I don't understand your question.
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Laos

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 57,903
    #5

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Locating something further in the past does not mean that it has no effect on the other past event. I would treat your grammar book with a degree of suspicion.

  5. keannu's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Dec 2010
    • Posts: 5,226
    #6

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Okay, could you just tell me that between 1 and 2, which denotes he was finally here with her?
    Which implies that the result of his coming had still lasted until she came and which implies that it hadn't until she came? Does it all depend on context?

    1. He had come here before she came.
    2. He had come here one hour ago before she came.

  6. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,093
    #7

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Quote Originally Posted by keannu View Post
    Okay, could you just tell me that between 1 and 2, which denotes he was finally here with her?
    Which implies that the result of his coming had still lasted until she came and which implies that it hadn't until she came? Does it all depend on context?

    1. He had come here before she came.
    2. He had come here one hour ago before she came.
    The point your book is making is something that we wouldn't worry about.
    "He had been waiting for two hours before she arrived." He was still waiting when she arrived. Her arrival terminated his waiting. This is what your book apparently means by "affecting" the most recent event. Most of these examples would probably have the verb 'to be' somewhere in them.
    "After I had taken some medicine, I felt a lot better." Your taking the medicine wasn't interrupted by your feeling a lot better, because it happened at a specific time separated in time from your feeling better.
    Such differences aren't important.

  7. keannu's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Dec 2010
    • Posts: 5,226
    #8

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Thanks a lot for your excellent explanation to the point. So do you think I'd better think of past perfect in terms of separation between the two events, not influence? Even in the separated case, there can still be influence, and that's the comparison I applied from the one between simple past tense(separated from the present)) and present perfect(continual until the present).
    I mean simple past tense corresponds to the separated past perfect, while present perfect to influential, continual past perfect, but according to your explanation, the exact analogy doesn't seem to work, what do you think?

    *Also, if my question is too complex, you can only answer this question. In Korea, we have two different terms like "big past" meaning separated past perfect and pure "past perfect". I don't know where this difference comes from and if it's meaningful.
    Last edited by keannu; 30-Sep-2012 at 00:29.

  8. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,221
    #9

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    I would be very surprised if any native speaker ever thought about a difference in the past perfect in "He had never eaten sushi before he dated Kim" and "He had already eaten when Kim arrived."
    I'm not a teacher, but I write for a living. Please don't ask me about 2nd conditionals, but I'm a safe bet for what reads well in (American) English.

  9. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,093
    #10

    Re: non-infuential past perfect

    Quote Originally Posted by keannu View Post
    *Also, if my question is too complex, you can only answer this question. In Korea, we have two different terms like "big past" meaning separated past perfect and pure "past perfect". I don't know where this difference comes from and if it's meaningful.
    Your question isn't too complex. You should use English grammar for English, and keep your Korean grammar for Korean.
    We do not discriminate between 'separate' and 'affecting' past perfect tenses, and nor should you.

Similar Threads

  1. past perfect or a specific time past perfect?
    By keannu in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24-Jan-2011, 19:16
  2. [Grammar] Past simple, past continuous and past perfect
    By fuadha in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18-Aug-2009, 12:17
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-Sep-2007, 20:23
  4. past perfect,past tense or present perfect?
    By njanja in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13-Apr-2007, 12:13
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18-Apr-2006, 17:18

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •