|
|
#2 (permalink) Wed Apr 18, 2007 13:33 pm What is the diff. between these statements and when to use which? |
|
|
he left for Paris and he has left for Paris are the same except that the results of the former aren't connected with the present, i.e. he could leave for Paris and after some time return.
He had left for Paris - means that he left before some moment in the past (which might be expressed by an additional phrase or clause, like this When I came in I was told that he had left for Paris, or might even be implied indirectly) Also when you convert direct speech into indirect, you might need this tense (past simple and present perfect should be turned into past perfect) They said "He left (has left) for Paris" ---> They said that he had left for Paris
Just my 2 cents. (I'd appreciade it if our respected native English speakers would take pains to bear out my explanation (or refute it if it in any way appears to be wrong)) :) |
|
Lost_Soul I'm a Communicator ;-)

Joined: 15 Sep 2006 Posts: 1861 Location: South Park, Colorado, USA
|
|
#3 (permalink) Wed Apr 18, 2007 13:52 pm What is the diff. between these statements and when to use which? |
|
|
Hi lost_soul,
Do you mean we have to use past perfect only when we are talking about two past actions? Can't we use it to describe one situation like the above "He had left for Paris"?
Also, I came across some explanations in other posts that we have to use Simple Past ONLY when we can specify a particular past time like yesterday, 2 days back etc. If so, are the below statements correct?
He left for Paris 2 days back. He has left for Paris.
Thanks, A Learner. |
|
EngLearner I'm new here and I like it ;-)
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 17
|
 |
|
| May I ask for the meanings of these sentences please? | An unusual sentence |