Why does Ross use Present Perfect here if he's speaking about the past?!
89880
I was told that if an action is completed once in the past, the simple past is used. Ex:  I saw that movie.  If the action is completed more than once, the present perfect tense must be used. Ex:  I have seen that movie twelve times.    So, "I have seen that movie twelve times on Tuesday." is correct and "I saw that movie twelve times on Tuesday." is incorrect?
123370
The rule says if the order of two actions/events is clear then the past perfect is not necessary, i.e. you can use past simple. So if the sentence has before or after then the order is clear and therefore the rule applies.  says the first sentence is incorrect. Is he/she right? If so, how do you explain what appears, to me, to be contradictory?     If the Past Perfect is not referring to an action at a specific time,   Past Perfect is not optional. Compare the examples below. Here Past   Perfect is referring to a lack of experience rather than an action at   a specific time. For this reason, Simple Past cannot be used.      Examples:      She never saw a bear before she moved to Alaska. Not Correct      She had never seen a bear before she moved to Alaska. Correct   They say "a lack of experience rather than an action". Saying that just does not solve the problem I have which is the past simple fits the rule of order of events. Not seeing is a negative event with the verb "to see".  I hope the answer won't be this is how we speak or this is how English works or since when languages are logical!
24811
I'm describing a situation that happened in the past. To explain it, I want to use a description that is both true now and true when the situation happened.  Specifically, I want something like:     She touched me where my neck met my collarbone.   Since my neck is still attached to my collarbone (thankfully), I'm wondering if I shouldn't use the present tense here instead:     She touched me where my neck meets my collarbone.   Which is preferable, and why?
79462
I am struggling to decide the correct tense / verb usage where one wishes to express some past plan for the then future:      We agreed that, when xyz happens, we would do abc.     We agreed that, when xyz happened, we would do abc.  Something else?   According to , the second form is correct because one must use  with clauses that begin with time expressions (such as "when").  This assessment is somewhat supported by , which suggests that the past tense must be used since xyz has already occurred and is now in the past.  However, to my mind, the second form doesn't quite convey the same contingency that abc would not be done until xyz happened; whereas the use of the present tense in the first form better conveys that contingency.  Are grammatical constructs of this sort known by some formal name?  What do authorities on English (especially British English) have to say on the matter (citations would be most welcome)?
35218
My question might seem to be stupid enough, it's basic grammar, I believe; however, I'm at my wits' end. Should we use Past perfect or Past Simple in the following sentence:     He promised/ had promised to turn up at 4, but appeared at 9?
17149
I have never had this problem before. But after seeing some questions posted on ELU, I started to doubt. I have been through links1, pages of grammar books2, a lot of questions3 posted here and ELU. I now still can't seem to understand how the past perfect is exactly used. The references sometimes even contradict each other.  What I had understood so far was      The past perfect is not necessary if we are not 'going back' to the earlier past, and simply moving from one event to another.   but I then saw a lot of other 'rules' including      If the sequence is clear, the past perfect is not needed.   which is slightly different, less 'narrow' and can be applied in more situations than the first ruleA, and      The past perfect is optional only when talking about an action at a specific time.   This is confusing. Can anyone here clarify things out please?    A For example, for  Doing the survey [completed] -&gt; Showing the result      We showed the result of the survey we did.      If the second rule is applied, the sentence above is fine (the sequence is clear), but not if the first rule since we are not moving from any event to the next and possibly even going back.    1  and   2 Practical English Usage (2005) by Michael Swan, Collins Cobuild Student's Grammar (1991). Upper-Intermediate Cutting Edge.  3 including , , ,  etc.
71127
According to  the use of past simple and present perfect is quite strict in British English, while in American English you can normally use simple past instead of present perfect:  In British English, the use of Simple Past and Present Perfect is quite strict. As soon as a time expression in the past is given, you have to use Simple Past. If there are no signal words, you must decide if we just talk about an action in the past or if its consequence in the present is important. Note that the following explanations and exercises refer to British English only. In American English, you can normally use Simple Past instead of Present Perfect. We cannot accept this in our exercises, however, as this would lead to confusions amongst those who have to learn the differences.  In the case of the noun to choose, if I'm correct, the difference between &quot;did choose&quot; and &quot;have chosen&quot;; the second is more definitive than the last. Can somebody give me a clear example of where the British use diverges from American English? As a non-native speaker, I find it hard to see/feel the difference between its use in British- and American English respectively.
577
Non-na­tive speak­ers of­ten get con­fused about what the var­i­ous tens­es  and as­pects mean in English. With in­put from some of the folk here I've put to­geth­er a di­a­gram that I hope will pro­vide some clar­i­ty on the mat­ter.  I of­fer it as the first an­swer to this ques­tion. Con­sid­er it a liv­ing doc­u­ment. In­put is wel­come, and good sug­ges­tions will be  in­cor­po­rat­ed in­to the di­a­gram.    No­ta bene: What this is not is a dis­cus­sion of whether there are  more than two tens­es in English. , to which this ques­tion is not in­tend­ed to sup­ply ar­gu­ments one way or the oth­er.  Here, the aim is to pro­vide an overview of what con­struc­tions English-speak­ing peo­ple use for con­vey­ing in­for­ma­tion about ac­tions re­fer­ring to past, present, and fu­ture, and to pro­vide it first and fore­most to pre­cise­ly the peo­ple who are like­ly to use "tense" as a catch-all term in their search, rather than to lin­guists who know bet­ter.  Break­ing News There is now an ex­cel­lent ELU blog ar­ti­cle ti­tled  . It is high­ly rec­om­mend­ed read­ing.
97789
Let's first talk about simple present tense. John : "I have a fever." John said that he has a fever. Here no change in tense because John still has a fever.  Now take an example of present perfect tense. John : "I have lost my keys." John said that he has lost his key. Here no change in tense because the effect of losing key (he can't get into his home) can still be seen, heard at the time of reporting.  First tell me is this 'has lost' correct in indirect speech under the condition that effect of loosing key can still be seen at the time of reporting ?  Now my question is something which is not an example of reported speech. 1) "I noticed that the clock has stopped." And 2) "The president learned that the earthquake has caused havoc all across the country.  Are these two sentences grammatically correct under the condition that clock has recently stopped and its effect can still be seen ? And under the condition that earthquake has recently come and its effect such as havoc all across the country can still be seen ?  You see my take on it is, if the simple present tense is not back shifted under the condition that words are still true at the time of reporting then present perfect tense can also be left unchanged under the condition that situation is still relevant at the time of reporting even if the main verb is in the past tense.   And I also feel that grammar rule is quite logical and correct but if the situation is still relevant then I believe that back shifting of present perfect tenses become optional. So what do you think about this. Did I get it right?
3526
Are these two sentences grammatically correct?   Mona told me that London was the biggest city in England. He wanted to know where Manchester was.   I found these two sentences by chance in an exercise book published by Egypt's  Ministry of Education. Both sentences talk about a fact, and Is it unreasonable to change the verb tense in reported speech to past simple when what the sentences talks about is still true? (As my teacher and the books say.) Or is it right when we talk about facts to change the tense or is the tense change optional and  both are correct?
12698
Regarding actions taken in the past, besides the differences those two tenses have semantically, my teacher shared that it could be a British vs American English case.   When talking about past action, British prefers present perfect because they take into account that the effect from their past action still happens until now. As for American, they prefer to state the action only. It happened in the past, so past tense it is.     I have had dinner. [British]   vs.      I had dinner. [American]   I hope to hear it from the native speakers, both British and American. What do you think about this? Is it true?  If it is, I don't think it can apply to all cases of past actions. There have to be cases when both style agree to use the same tenses. Could you please help me define the situation when this kind of difference applies and when doesn't?
48403
I have a doubt in the below sentence whether to use Past Simple or Present Perfect Tense,     We have despatched the parcel yesterday.      We despatched the parcel yesterday.   I know the second one is right because the parcel was despatched yesterday which means the action is completed (Past Tense).  But what about the first sentence, because the parcel was despatched, however the parcel is not reached the customer yet. So is it ok to use "have despatched" in the sentence (Present Perfect) in the mail to inform the customer?
53855
My friend asked me just today, "Hey, how are you?"        I said, "Tired, sleepy, and can't concentrate on my work."      He then asked, "Why so?"   Here is where the interesting part starts.       I said, "I have had a headache yesterday"   He said that I should have said "I had a headache yesterday" instead of "I have had a headache yesterday"  But all grammar books say that with Present Perfect + Past Tense we mean an action that continues into the present; has consequences in the present.  I didn't want to just tell the fact that I had a headache but I implied that that was the reason I was "Tired, sleepy, and can't concentrate on my work."  Who is right?
50883
I'm very confused about tenses.  I have examples in two different situations here. Situation 1: I went to New York two months ago and was talking to someone about it.  A. This is the first time I've been to New York. B. That was the first time I'd been to New York.  Which is correct in a daily conversation?  Situation 2: I'm going to New York next month and talking to someone.  A. This will be the first time I've been to New York. B. This is the first time I've been to New York. C. This will be the first time I go to New York.  Which sentence is appropriate?  According to a grammar article I've read before, I think it says that I can use this sentence in both cases:  This is the first time I've been to New York.  But I'm not sure if this is really so. So I'd like to know which tense I should use in each case. Could you explain it?
38635
"Why is your baby's face so dirty?"   "She _______ (eat) chocolate"   I know, the answer is Present Perfect Continuous - has been eating. What about the Present Perfect - has eaten? Can't we use it in similar situations?
39246
I have read an interesting book yesterday and underlined the new words which are simple but effective.    Present perfect tense specifies an action that has recently finished. The above sentence is present perfect if I am using have (I believe).  But in my book have is given as error and the sentence is corrected by removing have. I believe by removing have we are changing the tense to simple present. But simple present does not indicates an activity that is finished.  I am not sure why have is error in the above sentence. Please suggest.
55919
if someone asks me or if there is a question in exams like "who is the author of Xxx book?" Should I answer in the past or present tense,like "Yyy is/was the author of Xxx book". I know the author is not alive.