New answers tagged

1

Yes, it means 1991. But that has nothing to do with past perfect, it would be the same with simple past: I saw him last five years before. The word "before" needs a time to refer to, and the only possible reference in this context is "1996". It's short for "before then". To refer to a time relative to the current date you ...


1

'Today' is quite a long time in some contexts so present, future, past simple and past perfect tenses can all be combined with the word "today" For example: If you are speaking during a break in your class you can say "I am in class today". If you're speaking before your class begins, you can say "I will be in class today". If ...


0

If you are speaking after the end of the class but it's still the same day then it's okay to use 'I was in class today', so it's still past tense because the action of 'being in class' was in the past. But if you attending the class at that moment then it's not okay to use was. So in the end it depends on context.


4

Thinks I is an example of the historic present tense. This tense is used to add immediacy to the narrative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_present. Methinks/methought seems to have been passing out of the language at the time that Melville wrote, and "Thinks/Thought I" seems to be a transitional form. The third person form of the verb ...


0

Ishmael is narrating the story sometime afterward. (We find this out in the first page of the novel.) So perhaps thinks I refers to what Ishmael thinks now (when he is narrating), not what he thought at the time of the story.


0

This example is a beginners class: Did every thing go well ? Everything went well? This sentence is used incorrectly, is not a question is an answer. Used here incorrectly and making it confusing for all learners. Question: Did everything go well ? Answer: Everything went well Is a question the gramatical extructure is correct DID EVERYTHING GO WELL? DID =...


0

"If we started now we would be in time" In the context of being unable to start now, the sentence is the same as "If we could fly, we would be on time." Our ability to start is the same as our ability to fly, i.e. nil. What follows "we would be on time" is fantasy. (Or as it is often described "irrealis" - an ...


-1

If we started now we would be in time (but we cannot start now). The bracketed bit prevents the usual analysis of the sentence, so I've ignored it for the purposes of this answer. There's no subjunctive clause in your example. Subjunctive clauses are headed by a plain (infinitive) form of the verb. Some speakers (wrongly) claim that "If I were you"...


-2

If we started now we would be in time (but we cannot start now) Like you, I disagree with the book. There is no implication that we cannot start now. Nevertheless it is the past subjunctive. If we start now, we will be in time. (present indicative) If we started now we would be in time. (past subjunctive) Examples Mary: Are we ready to start yet? John: ...


1

"Playing" here is not a present participle, it is a gerund, i.e. a verb form that is used in place of a noun. Example The boy is playing. (present participle) The boy enjoys playtime. ("playtime" is a noun and is the direct object) The boy enjoys playing. ("playing" is a noun-equivalent and is the direct object of the verb "...


-1

There is a very good reason why the word anachronism is as it is. Its standard or most basic application is to mistakes which are the effects of ignorance or carelessness. For example, the recasting of Shakespearean plays in modern dress is not generally regarded as 'anachronistic', because the 'out of place' assault rifles etcetera are deliberate and so, ...


-2

Jesus with a computer, and me with a time-machine are both anachronisms. Anachronisms are things that are outside their time frame, both past and future. Lexico is lacking in its defintiond of anachronism. It has one meaning and two senses: OED 1. An error in computing time, or fixing dates; the erroneous reference of an event, circumstance, or custom to a ...


2

If the order of the two actions in the past is important, you should use the past perfect tense to show that "spending some of the money" was completed before "deciding to look for the dream house".


0

The correct form is 'No, you didn't.' The grammar section of the Cambridge Dictionary confirms that: The most common form of question is auxiliary did + use(d) to. Many people consider the form with a final -d to be incorrect, and you should not use it in exams: I think we met once, a couple of years ago. Did you use to work with Kevin Harris? Tag ...


1

You can. Both 'damaged' and 'injured' are fine. There are a few points to consider: 1) The past perfect forms could be used because those events referred to by the perfect occurred prior to their conjugates, thus serving the form's function: a) He damaged his knee before he began his two-year hiatus. b) He injured his knee before he fell down. 2) Though ...


0

The present perfect tense (as in, "I have never wanted to cook") expresses an action that began in the past and has its effects felt in the present. The simple past, on the other hand, expresses something that happened in the past, without regard to its present effects. The difference can be subtle or profound, depending on the context. To take an example ...


2

Kino's right. Both could be correct, depending on the the time relationship of the thinking and the saving. Try adding a clause that more fully explains what happened.


Top 50 recent answers are included