1

==> Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but Provider XYZ has made changes to the product a while ago that address the issue and markets are now embracing the product.

Is this sentence grammatically correct? My thinking was:

  • 1) Had not been / past perfect --> It is ready ever since Provider XYZ has released the product but since that was a while ago its a condition that changed in the past before the present.
  • 2) Has been /present perfect --> Provider XYZ released a product but this release is affecting the present and future and I want to underline that by using present perfect. I also don't know the exact moment when they released it.

Thank you for your help, much appreciated. Just wanted to make sure I am using past perfect correctly. At what point would you use "past tense" in a sentence like this? E.g. if you know exactly when the product was released.

marked as duplicate by Robusto, FumbleFingers, Ellie Kesselman, Chenmunka, ScotM May 8 '15 at 1:15

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Thank you for linking to the question but in the other question the person is not using present perfect, only present tense, so this is not a duplicate in my opinion – mashup Apr 25 '15 at 10:17
  • It addresses the same (non-)issue. – Robusto Apr 25 '15 at 10:28
2

There is no prohibition on using the past perfect and the present perfect in one statement. For example:

Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but Provider XYZ has now made changes to the product ... .

The problem here lies in the combination of a present tense (the present perfect) with an adjunct of past or finished time (a while ago). This is generally ungrammatical. For example:

*Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but last week Provider XYZ has made changes to the product ... .

*Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but in 2014 Provider XYZ has made changes to the product ... .

While some native speakers might find your original sentence marginally acceptable, you are safer using the past tense (preterite):

Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but Provider XYZ made changes to the product a while ago that address the issue and markets are now embracing the product.

And if the issue no longer exists, you could put 'address' into the past tense also.

Alternatively, you can replace the past time adjunct with one that extends time into the present and retain the present perfect:

Until more recently, Product XYZ had not been ready but Provider XYZ has
made changes to the product in the past few months that address the issue and markets are now embracing the product.

  • I like the alternative, thank you very much for providing so many examples. – mashup Apr 25 '15 at 11:18
1

The distance is time is too large and unjustified. Use the simple past:

Until recently, Product XYZ was not ready but Provider XYZ has made changes to the product a while ago.

especially as there are no simple past verbs to make for a smoother transition.

Your version is possible, but not preferred. E.g., at Google Books:

"until recently it had not been" "has been" About 3,220 results

"until recently it was not" "has been" About 64,400 results

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.