I thought you had left at 9am

[FalaGringo]

I would like to know if I should avoid indicating time when using the past perfect?

"I thought you had left at 9am." (Simple past + past perfect with time )
"I thought you left at 9am." (Simple past x 2 with time)
"I thought you had left." (Simple past + past perfect without time)

 

[jutfrank]

Are you really a native speaker?

I suggest you write a mini-dialogue so that we can understand exactly what you mean. Try to make it completely natural and unforced.

 

[FalaGringo]

Are you really a native speaker?

I suggest you write a mini-dialogue so that we can understand exactly what you mean. Try to make it completely natural and unforced.

Yes I am a native speaker.

I'll try to make things clearer and a little more understandable then.

When we use the present perfect we tend not to say the exact time period.

For example
"I have already left."
We would not say "I have left at 9am"

So, I would like to know if this is also the case with the past perfect

"Katie was asking about Michael in the afternoon, I told her I had gone to his house at 9am to have a chat with him."

Or perhaps the past simple be better...

"Katie was asking about Michael in the afternoon, I told her I went to his house at 9am to have a chat with him."

 

[5jj]

When we use the present perfect we tend not to say the exact time period.

For example, "I have already left."
We would not say "I have left at 9am"

So, I would like to know if this is also the case with the past perfect.

It is not.

I said (that) I had left at 9am is fine.

 

[GoodTaste]

Yes I am a native speaker.

Okay. What is the standard English pronunciation in your country?

 

[emsr2d2]

Okay. What is the standard English pronunciation in your country?

The standard pronunciation of what? That's not a question any native speaker would be able to answer.

 

[jutfrank]

I ask you FalaGringo whether you are a native speaker because this question seems to me very much to be one that a learner, not a native speaker, would ask. The way I'd answer this question to a native speaker would be very different way from how I'd answer a learner.

The general principle (which may strike you as blindingly obvious) is that we say things we need to say and we don't say things we don't need to say.

When we use the present perfect we tend not to say the exact time period.

For example
"I have already left."
We would not say "I have left at 9am"

I don't mean to be rude, FalaGringo, but this strikes me as a bizarre question. Why do you think the speaker doesn't say the exact time period? Do you think there's some kind of grammar rule here? Or is it just that the speaker doesn't need to say the time? Think about the context in which a speaker would say I've already left. (This is why I suggested you write a mini-dialogue—to help you frame the meaning in context.)

"Katie was asking about Michael in the afternoon, I told her I had gone to his house at 9am to have a chat with him."

Yes, that's a very well formed utterance. (Save the fact that it's actually two sentences—swap the comma for a full stop.)

Or perhaps the past simple be better...

"Katie was asking about Michael in the afternoon, I told her I went to his house at 9am to have a chat with him."

That's also correct, yes.

In both utterances above, the speaker mentions 9 am because it is absolutely instrumental to the meaning of the utterance. In other words, the speaker mentions the time because it's an important part of the message that he wants to convey. That means that the speaker feels it is necessary for whatever reason for the listener to know the precise time.

The difference between the two utterances is what we call aspect.

 

[FalaGringo]

I ask you FalaGringo whether you are a native speaker because this question seems to me very much to be one that a learner, not a native speaker, would ask. The way I'd answer this question to a native speaker would be very different way from how I'd answer a learner.

The general principle (which may strike you as blindingly obvious) is that we say things we need to say and we don't say things we don't need to say.



I don't mean to be rude, FalaGringo, but this strikes me as a bizarre question. Why do you think the speaker doesn't say the exact time period? Do you think there's some kind of grammar rule here? Or is it just that the speaker doesn't need to say the time? Think about the context in which a speaker would say I've already left. (This is why I suggested you write a mini-dialogue—to help you frame the meaning in context.)



Yes, that's a very well formed utterance. (Save the fact that it's actually two sentences—swap the comma for a full stop.)



That's also correct, yes.

In both utterances above, the speaker mentions 9 am because it is absolutely instrumental to the meaning of the utterance. In other words, the speaker mentions the time because it's an important part of the message that he wants to convey. That means that the speaker feels it is necessary for whatever reason for the listener to know the precise time.

The difference between the two utterances is what we call aspect.

I understand my questions may seem a little odd but yes, I am trying to identify grammatical rules and understand why we say things the way we say them, why we may or may not follow certain grammar rules because I am learning Portuguese, the more English grammar I understand, the better I am able to learn said language.

 

[FalaGringo]

Okay. What is the standard English pronunciation in your country?

Are you referring to RP?

I don't have an RP accent nor Cockney.

 

[5jj]

When we use the present perfect we tend not to say the exact time period.

True. If we mention the time of a past situation, we normally use a past tense.

So, I would like to know if this is also the case with the past perfect

When the past perfect serves as the past-time equivalent of the present perfect, then no past time is mentioned:

Peter: John has already left.
Paul (later): Peter told me that John had already left.

However, when the past perfect serves as the past-time equivalent of the past tense, the we can mention a past time:

Peter: John left at nine o'clock.
Paul (later): Peter told me that John had left at nine o'clock.