at a particular, finished time in the past....

[Rachel Adams]

Hello.

Could you please explain to me the definiton in bold? Advanced Grammar in Use Martin Hewings:

When we report that someone has recently invented, produced, discovered or written something
we use the present perfect. When we talk about something that was invented, etc. in the more
distant past we use the past simple. Compare:
• Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.
• It is often said that Hernan Cortes 'discovered' Mexico in 1519.
• Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.
• Chinese craftsmen invented both paper and printing.
Sometimes it makes very little difference to the main sense of the sentence if we think of something
happening in a period of time up to the present or at a particular, finished time in the past:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?
• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash.

 

[Rachel Adams]

I was confused by ''at a particular, finished time in the past''. It's taking about a finished action, am I right?

Is using past simple in the examples number 1 and 2 wrong? because unlike these examples: (The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success • Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash).
these examples below don't show us that something was happening at a particular time in the past?
1. Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.
2. Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.

Sorry, I can't remove bold.

I also have a question about these examples.
The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. The action continuous up to the present so either can be used , the book says but don't these sentences also express the idea that these actions continue up to the present?: ''Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs'' and
''Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying''.

 

[teechar]

I was confused by ''at a particular, finished time in the past''. It's taking about a finished action, am I right?

Yes, it is.

Is using past simple in [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] examples number 1 and 2 wrong?

You haven't numbered your examples. Which ones are those?

because unlike these examples: (The research is now ... crash).

I don't understand that. It's also incomplete.

these examples below don't show us that something was happening at a particular time in the past, do they?
1. Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.
2. Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.

I see what you mean. I'm already beginning to dislike that book. It should have used "at some (unspecified) time in the past". Those examples show that we use the present perfect for an action that took place in the past, but whose consequences are still relevant.

Sorry, I can't remove bold.

No problem. I've done that for you.

I also have a question about these examples.
The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. The action continuous [What do you mean by "continuous"?] up to the present so either can be used, the book says

If the book is saying that the action in those sentences is not finished, then throw that book in the bin! Again, those sentences are not an example of an action that started in the past and goes right up to the present; rather, they are examples of finished past actions that are still relevant. Those are two different uses of the present perfect.

but don't these sentences also express the idea that these actions continue up to the present?: ''Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs'' and
''Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying''.

See above.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Originally Posted by Rachel Adams
Is using past simple in the examples number 1 and 2 wrong?



You haven't numbered your examples. Which ones are those? These examples:1. Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.
2. Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.

Originally Posted by Rachel Adams
because unlike these examples: (The research is now ... crash). (The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success • Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash).
the numbered examples 1 and 2 above don't show us that something was happening at a particular time in the past, or do they show us that? If the book says:Sometimes it makes very little difference to the main sense of the sentence if we think of something happening in a period of time up to the present or at a particular, finished time in the past, then would it be wrong to use the past simple in: Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs?

 

[Rachel Adams]

Originally Posted by Rachel Adams
I also have a question about these examples.
The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. The action continues [What do you mean by "continuous"?] up to the present so either can be used, the book says

 

[Rachel Adams]

Again, those sentences are not an example of an action that started in the past and goes right up to the present; rather, they are examples of finished past actions that are still relevant. Those are two different uses of the present perfect. Sorry, are you talking about the first pair of examples or the second?

• Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. = finished past actions that are still relevant.
• Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.= finished past actions that are still relevant.

or
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. = finished past actions that are still relevant.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?

​Sometimes it makes very little difference to the main sense of the sentence if we think of something
happening in a period of time up to the present or at a particular, finished time in the past:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. Is this sentence an example of ''something happening in a period of time up to the present?''
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?
• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash. Idon't understand the connection between the underlined rule and the examples.

 

[teechar]

• Scientist have discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. = finished past actions that are still relevant.
• Two schoolchildren have invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.= finished past actions that are still relevant.

Yes.

• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success. = finished past actions that are still relevant.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?

If you use the present perfect in those, then yes, that would be for a past action whose consequences are still relevant.

 

[Rachel Adams]

What I was trying to find out was if the present perfect tense and the simple past tense can be used interchangeably in these examples:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?
• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash.

can they also be used interchangeably in these examples:
1. Scientist have discovered or discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.
2.Two schoolchildren have invented/or invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs.

 

[teechar]

What I was trying to find out was if the present perfect tense and the simple past tense can be used interchangeably in these examples:

A- The action in question is complete and has no present relevance.
B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant.
Which scenario do you think applies to those sentences?

Can they also be used interchangeably in these examples:

"Interchangeably" is the wrong word! Those (the past simple and the present perfect) are two different tenses, and I've already explained the difference in meaning. See the two scenarios (A and B) above.

Scientist have discovered or discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying.

Note that, although the above sentence is fine as it is, "all over the world" would be better after "frogs".

 

[Rachel Adams]

B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?
• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash. Somehow relevant.

And for these sentences too B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:
1. Scientist have discovered or discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. The are dying-so it's relevant.
2.Two schoolchildren have invented/or invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs. Hmmm, relevant.

Thank you for asking me what I think the right option is. It's quite useful for me as a student.

 

[emsr2d2]

[STRIKE]B-[/STRIKE]

The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still [STRIKE]somehow[/STRIKE] relevant:

• The research is now complete and the experiment was (or "has been") a success. "Was" is more likely but "has been" isn't impossible.
• Does it concern you that you failed (or "have failed") the test? They both work.
• I'm sure I read (or "I have read") somewhere that he died in a plane crash. ([STRIKE]Somehow[/STRIKE] Somewhat relevant.) "I read" is more likely but "I have read" isn't impossible.

And for these sentences too [STRIKE]B-[/STRIKE] The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:

1. Scientists have discovered (or "discovered") that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. They are dying (no hyphen here) so it's relevant. Without further context, use "have discovered".
2. Two schoolchildren have invented (or "invented") a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs. Hmmm, relevant. Without further context, use "have invented".

See above.

I don't know what "B-" means.

 

[teechar]

B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?

I would use the present perfect in those.

• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash. Somehow relevant.
And for these sentences too B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:
1. Scientist have discovered or discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. The are dying-so it's relevant.
2.Two schoolchildren have invented/or invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs. Hmmm, relevant.

If I felt that the relevance was strong enough, I would use the present perfect; otherwise, I would use the past simple. I think this is where there is room for variance.

 

[Rachel Adams]

• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash. Somehow relevant.
And for these sentences too B- The action in question happened (occurred and finished) in the past, but its results/consequences are still somehow relevant:
1. Scientist have discovered or discovered that, all over the world, millions of frogs and toads are dying. The are dying-so it's relevant.
2.Two schoolchildren have invented/or invented a device for moving large objects up flights of stairs. Hmmm, relevant.

If I felt that the relevance was strong enough, I would use the present perfect; otherwise, I would use the past simple. I think this is where there is room for variance.

Why doesn't the book say that? It says only ''have discovered'' ''have invented'' are correct options.

 

[teechar]

It says only ''have discovered''

There may be some justification for this one with "are dying" which I overlooked. However, the past simple is still possible, for example, if the discovery happened 50 years ago and the frogs are still (nowadays) dying.

''have invented'' are correct options.

I don't see why the past simple is not possible. Again, imagine that invention happened a long time ago; only the past simple would make sense in such a situation.

Why doesn't the book say that?

I don't know.

 

[emsr2d2]

Rachel, there's something going wrong with your quotes. Make sure you hit "Reply with Quote" if you just want to quote one response. If you want to quote more than that, you need to click the small "+ button on each of the other responses and "Reply with Quote" on the last one you want to quote.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Reasking to make sure I don't misunderstand. You would use the past simple instead of the present perfect in these examples and in similar examples if the relevance is strong enough and say; ''Scientists discovered that, all over the world'... and ''Two schoolchildreninvented a device''...

 

[Rachel Adams]

Thank you. Sometimes it won't let me do that when I hit ''Reply with Quote.'' I have to copy and paste the quote. I don't know why this happens. I think my PC has viruses.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Sometimes it makes very little difference to the main sense of the sentence if we think of something
happening in a period of time up to the present or at a particular, finished time in the past:
• The research is now complete and the experiment was {or has been) a success.
• Does it concern you that you failed {or have failed) the test?
• I'm sure I read {or I have read) somewhere that he died in a plane crash.

I am trying to match the explanations of the book with the examples. if we think of something
happening in a period of time up to the present, is this part: the experiment was {or has been) a success, failed {or have failed) the test, I read {or I have read). But which example shows something that happened at a particular, finished time in the past?

 

[emsr2d2]

I think my PC has viruses.

In that case, I highly recommend you clean up your PC before continuing. There's a risk that a virus can be passed on in a thread.