Working with Perfect Tenses
|
Dave is a Master Trainer for The Princeton Review. Click here to read more articles from The Princeton Review and to learn more about The Princeton Review's GMAT services. |
Verb tense is one of the more complex issues of English grammar, and usage experts can hold forth at length on the subtleties of the subject. Luckily, the GMAT doesn’t plumb too deeply into the nuances of tenses, but there are a few things beyond the simple past, present, and future that GMAT students should know. Perfect tenses are an example of a common situation in Sentence Completions: students can often use them correctly by ear, but if their ear fails them, they have no rules to fall back on. The two perfect tenses that the GMAT likes to test are the present perfect and the past perfect (there is also a future perfect tense, but it’s rarely used on the GMAT).
Present Perfect
The present perfect tense is formed by using the helper verb “has” or “have,” followed by the main verb. The choice of “has” or “have” is simply a matter of picking the one that agrees with the subject. The form of the main verb is called the past participle, but knowing that term isn’t important in order to form the tense correctly. (Some grammar terminology is necessary in order to discuss the rules and concepts, but it’s completely irrelevant to the exam itself since you only have to *use* rules correctly on the GMAT, not name them.) The following examples are in the present perfect tense.
(a) I have visited the Pantheon in Rome.
(b) She has been president of the University since July.
(c) The football team has boasted a winning record for two years.
(d) All your professors have earned advanced degrees in their subjects.
“Have visited,” “has been,” “has boasted,” “have earned.” The four sentences all use the present perfect tense, but they do so in two different ways, which represent the two different situations on the GMAT for which the present perfect is appropriate.
Something that has been completed in the past at an unspecified time.
Examples (a) and (d) fall into this category. In (a) we know that the visit to the Pantheon is complete, but we don’t know when it happened. The time is not specified. It could have been 10 years ago or last week. In (d) we have the same situation. The action (earning their degrees) is complete, but the time is unspecified. We have no information about when these degrees were earned.
Something that began in the past and carries into the present moment.
Examples (b) and (c) fall into this category. In (b) we have a situation (being president) that began in the past (July) and carries into the present moment (she’s still president). Likewise in (c), the football team’s winning record began in the past (two years ago) and carries into the present (it still has a winning record this year).
Past Perfect
The past perfect tense is formed by using the helper verb “had,” followed by the main verb (also a past participle, just as with the present perfect). Here are some examples.
(a) The weather had been unseasonably warm until the blizzard struck.
(b) I had abandoned the search for my watch when I discovered it in the drawer.
(c) Jeff had thought that nothing could be worse than Ewoks, but then he saw Jar-Jar Binks.
(d) Prior to the discovery of a hidden fingerprint, the detective had suspected another man.
“Had been,” “had abandoned,” “had thought,” “had suspected.” The four examples all use the past perfect tense, which is necessary in the following situation:
Speaking of something that happened in the past before another event, also in the past.
This is sometimes referred to as the “double past.” So for example, in (a) we have unseasonably warm weather not only in the past, but before a blizzard which is also in the past. In (b), the abandonment of the search is in the past and also prior to the discovery of the watch, another event in the past.
A second way of describing the past perfect is to contrast it with the present perfect. As discussed above, one of the uses of the present perfect is to describe something that began in the past and carries into the present moment. By contrast, the past perfect describes something that began in the past and *doesn’t* carry into the present moment because it’s been cut off by some intervening event. So in (c) we can say that Jeff had a belief that began in the past (about Ewoks) that doesn’t carry into the present because of the intervening event of seeing Jar-Jar. In (d) the detective’s belief in another man’s guilt began in the past but doesn’t carry into the present because of the intervening event of discovering the fingerprint.
Thus when a Sentence Completion question gives you answer choices that contain the present perfect or past perfect tenses as options, ask the following questions: Do I have an event completed in the past at an unspecified time? Do I have an event that began in the past and carries into the present moment? Do I have an event in the past that happened before another event also in the past? Do I have an event that began in the past that doesn’t carry into the present because of some intervening event? If the answer to either of the first two questions is yes, you want the present perfect. If the answer to either of the second two questions is yes, you want the past perfect. If the answer to all four questions is no, then you’re off the hook with perfect tenses, and looking for something else.
ashish on October 20th, 2009 at 3:53 am
awesome post
antest07 on October 20th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
So is there anything wrong if I changed the sentences to:
(a) I visited the Pantheon in Rome.
(d) All your professors earned advanced degrees in their subjects.
What's the differences between the above sentences and the present perfect sentences listed in the article?
I would like to point out that we should utilize "tense markers". Tense markers such as "since July" and "for two years" signals the present perfect tense. You can find articles of tense markers by searching the internet.
i) John have been to Rome. (That means John is not in Rome right now)
ii) John went to Rome. (That means John is still in Rome right now)
If present perfect describes something related to the present, then why i) says that John is not in England now? It seems that i) is not related to present anymore?
David Ragsdale on October 27th, 2009 at 11:42 am
So is there anything wrong if I changed the sentences to:
(a) I visited the Pantheon in Rome.
(d) All your professors earned advanced degrees in their subjects.
What's the differences between the above sentences and the present perfect sentences listed in the article?
The differences are subtle. The present perfect keeps more focus on the present, so the past action is relevant to now in some way. "I visited the Pantheon" is basically saying that it happened and it's done. It doesn't affect the "right now," it's not likely to be repeated, it's just over. Even if a specific time isn't mentioned, it's implied.
In contrast, "I have visited the Pantheon" indicates that this information is relevant to the present somehow, or that the action might be repeated. For example, perhaps I'm discussing with friends where to go on our next trip to Rome and I'm saying I've already been there and can describe it to them.
i) John have been to Rome. (That means John is not in Rome right now)
Actually, it doesn't give any information about where John is right now. He might be in Rome right now, or he might not. (Also, it should be "John *has* been to Rome.")
ii) John went to Rome. (That means John is still in Rome right now)
No, this also give us no information about the present whereabouts of John. Whether he is in Rome right now is unknown based on this sentence.
Nee on October 24th, 2009 at 5:25 am
Hi David,
In this senntence mentioned in your article above-
"I had abandoned the search for my watch when I discovered it in the drawer."
- doesn't it seem that both the actions (the abandonment and the discovery) happened simultaneously.
Like -"When I discovered my watch in the drawer, I abandoned the search"
David Ragsdale on October 27th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Hi David,
In this sentence mentioned in your article above-
"I had abandoned the search for my watch when I discovered it in the drawer."
- doesn't it seem that both the actions (the abandonment and the discovery) happened simultaneously.
Like -"When I discovered my watch in the drawer, I abandoned the search"
This is the beauty of the past perfect tense. While it sometimes seems superfluous because the context of the sentence makes the time relationships clear, in this example it's necessary to understand the meaning. "I had abandoned the search for my watch when I discovered in in the drawer," and "I abandoned the search for my watch when I discovered it in the drawer" mean two different things. In the first sentence the search had already been abandoned -- I had stopped searching -- and then I happily came across my watch in the drawer. In the second sentence I stopped searching for my watch at the precise moment I found it in the drawer (as there isn't much point in continuing to search after I've found it).
Taiana on November 17th, 2009 at 3:52 am
Hi David,
Could you give some more information adout the cases when Past Perfect is optional, i.e. we can use both PP and PS without any difference in the meaning? E.g. with "before, after, until" (and what other?) and etc. Is it true that some words, like "hardly" or "no sooner" mark the necessity of PP, but "as soon as" (and what other?), on the contrary, forbids using it?
David Ragsdale on November 18th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Hi David,
Could you give some more information about the cases when Past Perfect is optional, i.e. we can use both PP and PS without any difference in the meaning? E.g. with "before, after, until" (and what other?) and etc.
The times when you can use the past perfect or the simple past more or less interchangeably are determined more by the context of the sentence than by any particular word. The purpose of the past perfect is to indicate which of two past events occurred earlier, but if the sentence already makes that clear, then you can use the simple past. For example, "I wasn't tired in the afternoon because I had taken a morning nap," and "I wasn't tired in the afternoon because I took a morning nap" are both acceptable. Since it's clear that a morning nap must have happened before the afternoon, the past perfect is optional.
That's the answer to the larger grammar question. However, the GMAT will prefer the past perfect in such situations so you should choose it over the simple past on Sentence Correction problems.
Is it true that some words, like "hardly" or "no sooner" mark the necessity of PP, but "as soon as" (and what other?), on the contrary, forbids using it?
Words such as "hardly," "barely," "scarcely," and "no sooner" usually go with the past perfect when you are indicating that one event happened immediately before another, e.g., "I had barely taken a breath when the next wave crashed over my head." "No sooner had I locked the door than the phone started ringing." This isn't a 100% can-never-be-violated rule, but it's a excellent guideline.
"As soon as" definitely does not rule out the past perfect. Here are a few examples. "As soon as I had finished speaking, the crowd burst out in wild applause." "We threw out the leftovers as soon as our dinner guests had left."