# viniste para acompañarla (present perfect / simple past)



## mariente

Hola! se que esto lo pregunté alguna vez pero es que no lo encuentor y no termino de entenderlo. El tema es sobre cuándo se puede usar el present perfect y el simple past indistantamente, sé que hay un caso.

 por ejemplo decir: you came to accompany her y 
                          you have come to accompany her ??

             para decir: viniste para acompañarla? a mi me parece que estan bien las 2 y las 2 quieren decir lo mismo y que son intercambiables en este caso. 
                       en este caso sería: viniste para acompañarla y has venido para acompañarla son lo mismo.

Gracias!!


----------



## Luis Albornoz

you have come to : implica que estás aquí en este momento para acompañarla

you came to: sugiere que viniste otro día a acompañarla si ahora estás aquí quizá sea por otra razón.


----------



## Juana la Loca

you came to accompany her   (es una acción completamente terminada)
You came to accompany her Yesterday. 
This morning, you came to accompany her. Pero luego te fuiste. You are not here now. 
 You have come to accompany her (esto acaba de suceder ) your are still here..


----------



## mariente

a ok. Gracias, ahora lo tengo claro. Pero una pregunta, si no tengo referencia de tiempo, puedo usar los 2 indistantamente no? O simplememente el present perfect??

I ve been to NY twice
I went to NY twice. Cual es la correcta?


----------



## Carlos1980

Hay que matizar que en inglés británico y en el americano , muchas veces no  coinciden en  la utilización del mismo tiempo verbal ( present perfect o simple past ) para una misma idea , de la misma forma que ocurre lo mismo en sus tiempos análogos en español que ante la misma idea un hablante nativo de español según su dialecto utilizaría un tiempo u otro.


----------



## mariente

Conclusión? cual sería la correcta en mi ultimo ejemplo entonces ?? gracias


----------



## mariente

Creo que un libro de FCE que tengo me dice que si no tengo referencia de tiempo puedo usar present perfect porque no le importa al present perfect el tiempo. Pero tambien el past simple creo que es correcto porque es una accion terminada


----------



## pankurst

Hola Mariente! (Perdon por escribir sin acentos, es un teclado aleman.)

La diferencia teorica entre los dos tiempos es (en ingles britanico) que el past simple hace referencia a un tiempo pasado y acabado (por eso se usa con expresiones como "yesterday", "last week", etc. porque, cuando dices la frase, ya no es "yesterday" ni "last week"), mientras que el present perfect siempre relaciona el presente con el pasado (tipicamente va con expresiones como "today", "this week", etc. porque, cuando hablas, sigue siendo "today" o "this week"). Es un poco dificil explicarlo en pocas palabras, pero las tipcas situaciones en que se usa el present perfect (porque hay relacion pasado-presente) son:
1) cuando se habla de experiencias: Have you ever met someone famous? (Nos referimos en toda tu vida-pasado- hasta ahora-presente)
2) La accion es pasada pero tiene una consecuencia presente: ex1.Have you seen Mary? (La viste en el pasado? Pero la estoy buscando en el presente. ex2: Who has broken the window? (La accion de romper es pasada pero la consecuencia es presente: la ventana esta rota ahora.)

En estos casos, se habla en present perfect pero siempre que no haya referencias de tiempo acabado (yesterday, last month, etc.). Ademas, cuando se entra en detalles, pasamos al past simple.
Ex: A: Have you seen "The Lord of the Rings"? B: Yes, I have. A:  DID you like it? (Pasamos al past simple porque empezamos a hablar de detalles)

Puedes comparar frases como estas:
1) I have seen Mary this afternoon (Cuando se dice la frase, sigue siendo "afternoon")
2) I saw Mary this afternoon. (La frase se dice por la noche, ya no es afternoon, y por lo tanto no hay relacion pasado-presente, es un tiempo pasado y acabado)

Concretando mas sobre tu pregunta, algunas veces se puede usar ambos pero entonces hay que ver el contexto. En todo caso, en ingles britanico el present perfect se usa mucho menos que el past simple, asi que, si dudas, ya sabes.
Ah! Y sobre tus dos frases:
1) Have been to NY twice. --> Esto quiere decir dos veces en toda tu vida hasta ahora.
2) I went to NY twice. --> Esto quiere decir que fuiste dos veces "last year", por ejemplo, o "when I was living in America". 
Para saber cual es correcta, necesitariamos mas contexto.


----------



## Rene_Rondon

Saludos a todos!

Soy nuevo en esta página y quisiera saber, sin animos de desviar el tema que ustedes han propuesto, si en este Foro es posible que, como en otros Foros que he visto (uno donde se cruzan el Japones y el Español, especialmente el hablado en México) se puede practicar idiomas foráneos para ir practicando y donde las explicaciones, por ejemplo en mi caso que soy latino, sean dadas en ingles (que es el idioma que quiero aprender)

La idea seria que si bien se propone un tema, sea de la indole que sea, los angloparlantes aporten ideas o comentarios SOLO en español y viceversa, nosotros los latinos escribamos también SOLO en inglés, de manera tal que podamos practicar otro idioma y a la vez irnos corrigiéndonos mutuamente si incurrimos en algún error.

Ojalá esto sea posible acá mismo en este Foro, pués he visto que han surgido muy buenas discusiones y los participantes se apoyan entre sí, aunque no se si haya mucha gente con el mismo propósito que el mio.

Mil gracias!


----------



## mariente

Si, gracias


----------



## roxcyn

Aquí hay un papel para usted, espero que sea útil 

http://rapidshare.com/files/2964975/PastVsPP.doc.html

Haga un clic en FREE, y después marque el código que aparece en la fotografía.


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:





mariente said:


> a ok. Gracias, ahora lo tengo claro. Pero una pregunta, si no tengo referencia de tiempo, puedo usar los 2 indistantamente no? O simplememente el present perfect??
> 
> I ve been to NY twice
> I went to NY twice. Cual es la correcta?


Sus ejemplos son exactamente igual en inglés de EEUU.  Si analize los semanticos, "I've been to..." significa «*en *Nuevo York.» y "I went to..." significa «*el viaje* *a* Nuevo York." pero casi nadie use en este manera ahora.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

OK, entonces conclusión a ver si entendí, perdón que sea repetitiva pero esta duda me aqueja hace años.
Si no tengo ninguna referencia uso el present perfect, en cambio si la tengo y esa accion ya esta concluida uso el simple past, 
¿ok?


----------



## roxcyn

mariente said:


> OK, entonces conclusión a ver si entendí, perdón que sea repetitiva pero esta duda me aqueja hace años.
> Si no tengo ninguna referencia uso el present perfect, en cambio si la tengo y esa accion ya esta concluida uso el simple past,
> ¿ok?


 
Sí, es verdad


----------



## mariente

Una duda más:
Si yo digo:
We ve been married for 20 years. Quiero decir que todavía estamos casados verdad?
Ahora si digo: we were married for 20 years. Ya no estamos casados. La pregunta esta estaría bien?: how long were you married? cuanto tiempo estuvieron casados? --> ya no estan mas casados.

Y qué hay del for? Me genera duda, es imprescindible ponerlo?
Gracias!!!


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:

Tienes razón.  Cuando usa  "have been" o "were" (present perfect vs simple past of the verb to be) su análisis es exactamente correcto.  

PERO sus ejemplos originales fueron "have been" y "went" (present perfect of the verb to be vs simple past of the verb "to go").  Este es un caso muy differente.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## Jonathan1975

"For" es opcional...

We´ve been married (for) 8 years.

Jonathan


----------



## mariente

mazbook said:


> Hola mariente:
> 
> Tienes razón. Cuando usa "have been" o "were" (present perfect vs simple past of the verb to be) su análisis es exactamente correcto.
> 
> PERO sus ejemplos originales fueron "have been" y "went" (present perfect of the verb to be vs simple past of the verb "to go"). Este es un caso muy differente.
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


Me temo que no entiendo lo que me querés decir.
Alguien si me puede decir si esta bien lo que entendí y si lo puse bien en mis últimos ejemplos por favor. Gracias 
Y otra cosa: si yo digo: I ve studied english (for) 22 years. Significa que aun sigo estudiando no?


----------



## Bespelled

Hola mariente,



> Y otra cosa: si yo digo: I ve studied english (for) 22 years. Significa que aun sigo estudiando no?


 
Resulta que no siempre. El present perfect se puede usar tambien para expresar una relacio'n con el presente. (en tu caso puede ser por ejemplo el estado corriente de tu ingles: "I have studied English for 5 years but it still isn't very good") 

Para hacer el e'nfasis sobre el hecho que aun estas estudiando dices:
"I have been studying English for 5 years." 

 El past tense, en ese caso, lo usas mas con un periodo definido e acabado en el pasado:

"I studied English for three years _when I was in school_."

Sigue este link para una discucio'n sobre el significado de "I have studied English for..."

http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/6104-present-perfect-x-present-perfect-continuous.html

Saludos


----------



## Bespelled

Hola,



> We ve been married for 20 years. Quiero decir que todavía estamos casados verdad?


 
Si', es asi'.



> Ahora si digo: we were married for 20 years. Ya no estamos casados. La pregunta esta estaría bien?: how long were you married? cuanto tiempo estuvieron casados? --> ya no estan mas casados.


 
Si, estari'a bien. Aqui te doy un link a un cuestionario para un studio de los divorciados. 

http://www.familymattersnow.com/part1_page1.asp

Observa la octava pregunta "How long *were you married*?.." y contrastala con la segunda "How long *have you been divorced*?"

Como el cuestionario es para los divorciados, el autor supone que los que responden estan divorciados y, naturalmente, que no son ya casados. De aqui la diferencia.

Saludos


----------



## mariente

Gracias ahora lo tengo claro. Y en cuanto a lo I have estudied english for 20 years, es cierto que se enfatiza con el have been studying pero lo que significa i have studied english for 20 years significa que empezaste a etsudiar en el pasado y hoy dia seguis estudiando. Eso al menos fue lo me enseñaron siempre que aprendí en el colegio. Una unfinished action o una accion que tiene consecuencias en el presente. Asi que si alguien me dice: i have studied english for 20 years, entiendo que todavia sigue estudiando, pero es cierto tambien. Si digo el I have been studying enfatizo.Esta bien lo que entendí no? 
Otra cosa: si yo digo: i study english since 1980, o "its 4 years since i study english" o "since i ve studied english", las 3 quieren decir que todavia estudio, verdad? estan graamticalmente bien? gracias!


----------



## Luis Albornoz

Mariente:

*I have studied English for 20 years.*
*I have been studying English for 20 years.*

Estoy de acuerdo con vos, son muy parecidas, podrían utilizarse casi siempre en forma intercambiable. La diferencia es sólo de matiz.


En cuanto a:
*I study english since 1980.*
Ésta me suena mal, no sé si es incorrecta, pero pide a gritos el present perfect.

Respecto de:
*It's 4 years since I study English*
*It's 4 years since I've studied English*

Éstas me suenan peor, me parece que exigen el Simple past.

It's 4 years (now) since I began to study English.
It's been 4 years since I began to study English.

(it's 4 years since=four years ago)


Pero en realidad no estoy seguro, sería interesante escuchar otras opiniones mejor calificadas. (Hasta da para iniciar otro hilo)


----------



## mariente

Lo que me decis me suena extraño,  its 4 years since i began study (el to creo que no va) english, no estoy segura de que este bien. Me refiero a son 4 años desde que estudio, o sea, todavia estudio. 
Bueno si alguien me puede sacar del dilema de lo planteado anteriormente, algun nativo! lo voy a agradecer


----------



## sound shift

Luis Albornoz said:


> Mariente:
> 
> *I study english since 1980.*
> Ésta me suena mal, no sé si es incorrecta, pero pide a gritos el present perfect.



Sí que *I study English since 1980* es incorrecta. 
Hay que decir *I have studied English since 1980 *o *I have been studying English since 1980.

*Saludos


----------



## Jonathan1975

*It's 4 years since I study English*
*It's 4 years since I've studied English*

These should read

It´s been 4 years since I began to study English.

Or, the same basic idea...

I´ve studied English for 4 years.

If you say, "It´s been 4 years since I studied English," it means that four years have passed and you haven´t studied English during that time.

Jonathan


----------



## mariente

Muchas gracias!!


----------



## mariente

What if i say: I studied english for 4 years. It means i studied and i no longer study, right?


----------



## sound shift

mariente said:


> What if i say: I studied english for 4 years. It means i studied and i no longer study, right?


Yes, that's right.


----------



## HyphenSpider

> Lo que me decis me suena extraño, its 4 years since i began study (el to creo que no va) english


 
En realidad, diría que "begin" debe ir seguido de "*to + inf.*" o *gerundio*:

It's been 4 years since I began to study/studying  English.

Salu2!


----------



## mariente

según el diccionario se dice begin to+verb inf, no se si verb + ing esta correcto


----------



## Jonathan1975

según el diccionario se dice begin to+verb inf, no se si verb + ing esta correcto

Son iguales...

It´s been four years since I began to study English.
It´s been four years since I began studying English.

Jonathan


----------



## mariente

Jonathan1975 said:


> según el diccionario se dice begin to+verb inf, no se si verb + ing esta correcto
> 
> Son iguales...
> 
> It´s been four years since I began to study English.
> It´s been four years since I began studying English.
> 
> Jonathan


 
Una pregunta: esta bien decir:
I ve expected this day "for" 12 years--> espero este dia hace 12 años
I have been expecting this day for 12 day--> same thing

meaning the same thing:
Its been 12 years since i ve expected this day
Its been 12 years since i have been expecting this day

y:

If i lived in the EEUU i would speak a better english--> si viviera en EEUU hablaría mejor inglés

y:

If i had lived in the EEUU i would speak a better english--> si hubiese vivido en EEUU hablaria mejor ingles.

??? gracias!!

If i had live
I


----------



## mariente

Jonathan1975 said:


> según el diccionario se dice begin to+verb inf, no se si verb + ing esta correcto
> 
> Son iguales...
> 
> It´s been four years since I began to study English.
> It´s been four years since I began studying English.
> 
> Jonathan


 
Por que no ponés since i ve begun y lo pones en simple past? En simple past el began no quiere decir que ya no estudias?? en cuyo caso, si quiero decir que sigo estudiando , no va present perfect? 
Por qué no es its been four years since i ve begun ¿¿ es porque ya esta puesto al principio¿


----------



## roxcyn

Sí, puedes decir: It's been four years since I began to study English porque lo estás diciendo que empecé a estudiar inglés hace 4 años, y hoy hace 4 años que estudias inglés.


(Past: I began to study English, 2002)-----------------------------Present(2006)

It has been four years since I began to study English.  

(I began to study English in 2002.  Today is 2006.  That is 4 years that I have been studying English.  It has been 4 years since I began to study English)

Espero que entiendas.


----------



## mazbook

mariente said:


> Una pregunta: esta bien decir:
> I ve expected this day "for" 12 years--> espero este dia hace 12 años
> I have been expecting this day for 12 years--> same thing
> 
> meaning the same thing:
> Its been 12 years since i ve expected this day
> Its been 12 years since i have been expecting this day
> 
> y:
> 
> If I lived in the EEUU I would speak a better English--> si viviera vivo _o _viva (¿?) en EEUU hablaría mejor inglés  En inglés, la forma "If + preterito simple" muchas (todas¿?) veces necesita traducir como la presente conditional simple en español.
> 
> y:
> 
> If I had lived in the EEUU I would speak a better English--> si hubiese vivido en EEUU hablaria mejor ingles.
> 
> ??? gracias!!
> 
> If I had lived
> I


Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> a ok. Gracias, ahora lo tengo claro. Pero una pregunta, si no tengo referencia de tiempo, puedo usar los 2 indistantamente no? O simplememente el present perfect??
> 
> I ve been to NY twice
> I went to NY twice. Cual es la correcta?


 
Ambas acciones estan en el PASADO, pero con el presente perfecto hay una IMPLICACIÓN de que piensas volver a NY.

Con el pasado simple la acción de volver no está en tus planes. Simplemente ocurrió y se acabó.

El presente perfecto hay una mezcla de pasado y presente ( con el momento presente). Si hay una marca de pasado Ayer, anoche, hace ( ago), el año pasado, etc. se debe usar el pasado simple.
La intención y el contexto del hablante ayudan a usar uno u otro.
Por ejemplo si estoy en Madrid de paseo, es más lógico usar el presente perfecto, he estado en Madrid dos veces en vez de estuve en Madrid dos veces.
Además como no hay precisión de marcadores de tiempo es mejor el *PRESENTE* PERFECTO I HAVEW BEEN to NY twice.

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

A ver me pueden decir si estas oraciones tan correctas:

It is 4 years since I ve studied english

It is 3 months since i have the ticket--hace 3 meses que tengo la entrada

It s been 3 months since i have  had the ticket--meaning the same as above

I have had the ticket for 3 months --> tengo el boleto hace 3 meses

I cant believe they invented it-->esta frase la vi en los simpsons y digo no debería haber sido: they ve invented, digo, la accion tiene consecuencias en el presente

I have done many courses  --> los hice, pero al no especificar cuando correspondería el present perfect, right?

I did many courses.--> los hice

MAzbok podrias explicarme las correcciones que me hiciste?

Gracias


----------



## mariente

mazbook said:


> Saludos desde Mazatlán



En español las situaciones hipoeticas no se dicen: si vivo en EEUU hablaria mejor ingles, eso esta mal en español. Lo correcto es si viviera en EEUU


----------



## sound shift

mariente said:


> A ver me pueden decir si estas oraciones tan correctas:
> 
> It is 4 years since I ve studied english
> - Quiere decir que hace 4 años que dejé de estudiar inglés (en los últimos 4 años *no *estudié el inglés).
> 
> It is 3 months since i have the ticket--hace 3 meses que tengo la entrada
> - No se dice esto. No tiene sentido.
> Sí que se puede decir _It is 3 months since I bought the ticket; _o
> _ I have had the ticket for three months._
> 
> It s been 3 months since i have  had the ticket--meaning the same as above
> - Tampoco se puede decir.
> 
> I have had the ticket for 3 months --> tengo el boleto hace 3 meses
> 
> I cant believe they invented it-->esta frase la vi en los simpsons y digo no debería haber sido: they ve invented, digo, la accion tiene consecuencias en el presente - La frase está correcta
> 
> I have done many courses  --> los hice, pero al no especificar cuando correspondería el present perfect, right? Sí.
> 
> I did many courses.--> los hice
> 
> MAzbok podrias explicarme las correcciones que me hiciste?
> 
> Gracias


----------



## mariente

Si, gracias a lo que hoy entonces es a la pregunta siguiente : caso en que puedo usar tanto el present perfect como el simple past

I did many courses-- me pusiste bien pero aca tampoco estoy dando referencia de tiempo. Cual es la diferencia?

I have done many courses

I cant believe they invented.
I cant believe they ve invented. 
Ambas oraciones tienen una consecuencia en el presente, puesto que ya esta estan inventadas las cosas. 
Lo mismo con los cursos que hice, hoy tengo las consecuencias de haber hecho los cursos. Y por otro lado al ser unspecified time corresponde el present perfect, por lo tanto, ¿por qué estan correctas las oraciones en simple past?


----------



## roxcyn

Es muy similar en español, ¿no?:
Yo hice muchas clases.
He hecho muchas clases.  

No podía creer que inventaran algo....
No podía creer que hubieran inventado algo...

Para situaciones como estos, suele usar el presente perfecto en Reino Unido y en los Estados Unidos se suele usar el pasado simple.  Ejemplo:

(En Reino Unido):
A) Have you eaten your breakfast?
B) Yes, I have.....

(En Estados Unidos):
A) Did you eat your breakfast?
B) Yes, I did.....


----------



## mariente

Entonces en estos ultimos ejemplos, estan correctas las 2? uno es EEUU y otro UK? pero se admiten los 2? igual creo que el present perfect iria mejor, que te parece?. El tema es que estos casos se usan indistatamente y no se cómo darme cuenta, porque yo tiendo a aplicar la regla y usar el present perfect


----------



## roxcyn

Sí, los dos son correctos .  Puede usar los dos en cualquier lugar, pero suele usar el pasado simple en los Estados Unidos y el presente perfecto en Reino Unido, igual como en español: suele usar el presente perfecto en España y los otros países suelen usar el pretérito.


----------



## mariente

Muchas gracias! Entonces ya llegué a donde quería llegar. Igual vuelvo a preguntar: como me doy cuenta? pero creo que entendí. Era una duda que tenia hace años


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> A ver me pueden decir si estas oraciones tan correctas:
> 
> It is 4 years since I ve studied english
> *I have studied English for 4 years*
> *I have been studyng English  for 4 years.*
> *Correctas.*
> 
> It is 3 months since i have the ticket--hace 3 meses que tengo la entrada
> 
> *I have had the ticket for 4 years.*
> *Correctas*
> 
> It s been 3 months since i have had the ticket--meaning the same as above
> 
> I have had the ticket for 3 months --> tengo el boleto hace 3 meses
> 
> I cant believe they invented it-->esta frase la vi en los simpsons y digo no debería haber sido: they ve invented, digo, la accion tiene consecuencias en el presente.
> *Imposibilidad absoluta I cannot, can't, couldn't.*
> 
> I have done many courses --> los hice, pero al no especificar cuando correspondería el present perfect, right?
> *Presente perfect for repetition of an activity*
> 
> *Correct*
> 
> I did many courses.--> los hice
> *correcto.*
> 
> *Ivy29*


----------



## Luis Albornoz

No podía creer que inventaron algo.... 
No podía creer que han inventado algo... 

No podía creer que inventaran 
No podía creer que hubieran inventado


----------



## roxcyn

Luis Albornoz said:


> No podía creer que inventaron algo....
> No podía creer que han inventado algo...
> 
> No podía creer que inventaran
> No podía creer que hubieran inventado



Sí, lo he escrito muy mal y se me olivdó poner los verbos en el subjuntivo


----------



## mariente

Bueno, ellos lo habian traducido como no puedo creer que lo hayan inventado

Otra cosa: cual es la diferencia entre decir it is 4 years y its been 4 years?

Esta correcto entonces: its 3 months since i have had the ticket?


----------



## pachanga7

Hola mariente,

  Trataré de dar una idea de cómo entiendo yo los ejemplos que Ud ha dado, algunos de los cuales son correctos y otros no. 

  Para empezar, creo que el ejemplo de Simpson’s ayudará mucho a tenerlo claro cuando se entiende que el utilizar el presente perfecto es como pintar un cuadro completo, es decir, tratar del pasado y del presente a la vez, y que muchas veces la elección entre ello y el pasado sencillo depende del humor del hablante.  Miremos:  

  Cuando dice alguien “I’ve been to New   York twice” para mí es una frase completa.  Indica que la persona ya está lista para hablar de sus experiencias, teniendo presente los recuerdos y los efectos del pasado.  Sería una invitación a otros que también han visitado la cuidad a que hablen de sus experiencias del lugar, unas pinceladas exuberantes con que ya se entiende la idea del cuadro.

  En cambio si dice “I went to New   York twice” me parece que no más es un trozo que exige más explicaciones o antes o después.  Anticipo que el hablante va a agregar más detalles (o que llego tarde y ya los dio) para así llegar al sentido de qué es lo que quiere comunicar.  Implica cierta distancia en que su sentido queda en algún conjunto desconocido.  Es como un fragmento del cuadro solamente.  Hay que tomar unos pasos atrás para captarlo bien.   

  Ahora con los Simpsons, teniendo en cuenta que el sentido del presente perfecto tiene su énfasis en el presente (mientras que se está hablando del pasado):

  El clave es que el hablante dice que NO cree.   No acepta lo que ha pasado y mucho menos va a aceptar que tiene efectos en el presente.   El presente perfecto crea un ambiente expansivo, abierto y efusivo, mientras el comentario de los Simpsons busca crear una distancia:  NO lo creo!  Ironicamente, a mi parecer tiene el efecto de enfatizar que la hazaña sí se logró porque el pasado sencillo es así: tajante, brusco, enfático.  El invento sí se logró.   Pero no lo creo de todos modos.  

  Cuando presencia los efectos actuales de alguna acción toda una comunidad, por ejemplo si se trata de una boda o un divorcio, luego es fácil escoger el tiempo adecuado según unas reglas fijas:  We have been married (or divorced) for such-and-such amount of time.   We were married (but not any more).   Bueno, obviamente.  No hay mucho para debatir en ellos.   

  Otras veces los efectos actuales depende más del humor y actitud del hablante, como en el ejemplo de los Simpsons y algunos otros que Ud ha dado.  “I have studied German” indica cierta actidud por parte del hablante sobre el hecho: yo diría que está abierto a utilizarlo en algún trabajo o de reconocer sus conocimientos de alguna manera.   En cambio, “I studied German” (hay que reconocer que se trata un trozo gramátical o si no, luego un comentario bien brusco), aún suponiendo que el hablante ya domina el idioma, implica cierta distancia al hecho, una distancia que puede originarse en motivos emocionales o también muy posiblemente por que el dato viene colocado en un contexto más amplio, como un solo detalle del cuadro (“I studied German in high school and really enjoyed it”).   

  También hay que pensar en las implicaciones de los verbos.  Si alguien empieza a estudiar un idioma puede que sigan por mucho tiempo pero el principio ya está en el pasado, ¿verdad?  Sin embargo sí se puede decir “I have begun studying German” y claramente como otros ya han dicho implica que sigue estudiando el alemán y también que el hablante se considera un principiante todavía.   El tono es abierto, cordial.  

  Pero con la mal escrita “It’s been five years since I have begun my studies in German” bueno, la palabra “since” implica una distancia en sí, ¿no?  Mientras que el presente perfecto conlleva una cierta cordialidad, quizás un abrazo afectuoso....y para el colmo “to begin something” es algo que queda allí en el pasado aunque posiblemente seguimos en la acción que una vez empezáramos.  En fin, en inglés no se dice “since I have (done whatever)” jamás, los sentidos de los palabras luchan entre sí y nos da vértigo (siempre que estamos hablando de since = desde y no since = dado que).  

  Mientras que estamos hablando de reglas categóricas, tampoco se dice “It is five years since" o “It is five minutes since” o lo que sea.  Siempre “It’s been X amount of time since…”  No tiene matices, es solamente una regla.    

  Espero que le ayudé un poco.   Saludos.


----------



## mariente

si, gracias. Igual creo que ya lo tengo claro. BUeno el sabado fu ia ver a new order y durante el reci, nos dijo: you have been such a wonderful audience. Si hubiese querido decir: son una gran audiencia: hubiera usado el simple present y dicho: you are such, lo que pasa es que lo dijo al momento de los bises, entonces era casi el final, por lo tanto aunque faltaban 3 o 4 temas, yo lo traduciría como fueron una gran audiencia, ¿qué te parece?


----------



## pachanga7

Bueno, no puedo decir qué suena mejor en castellano pero la frase en inglés es estándard, casi no se la oye de otra forma (eso es, el verbo, el adjetivo sí cambia).  Supongo que lo dijeron en ese momento porque pensaban que sería el último momento en qué iban a dirigirse a la audiencia.   

Es interesante que no se usa el presente simple o el pasado simple, porque cualquier de los dos lógicamente puede caber. Creo que refleja el mismo tema de antes, es decir, la naturaleza amistosa del presente perfecto.


----------



## Ivy29

pachanga7 said:


> Bueno, no puedo decir qué suena mejor en castellano pero la frase en inglés es estándard, casi no se la oye de otra forma (eso es, el verbo, el adjetivo sí cambia). Supongo que lo dijeron en ese momento porque pensaban que sería el último momento en qué iban a dirigirse a la audiencia.
> 
> Es interesante que no se usa el presente simple o el pasado simple, porque cualquier de los dos lógicamente puede caber. Creo que refleja el mismo tema de antes, es decir, la naturaleza amistosa del presente perfecto.


 
Una pequeña corrección = *ESTÁNDAR* (español)

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

pachanga7 said:


> Bueno, no puedo decir qué suena mejor en castellano pero la frase en inglés es estándard, casi no se la oye de otra forma (eso es, el verbo, el adjetivo sí cambia). Supongo que lo dijeron en ese momento porque pensaban que sería el último momento en qué iban a dirigirse a la audiencia.
> 
> Es interesante que no se usa el presente simple o el pasado simple, porque cualquier de los dos lógicamente puede caber. Creo que refleja el mismo tema de antes, es decir, la naturaleza amistosa del presente perfecto.


Pero si tuvieras que traducirlo al español, ¿como lo dirías?


----------



## i heart queso

Otra cosa más que quiero añadir porque no sé si alguien ya lo ha aclarado:

I bought the ticket three months *ago*.
It's been three months *since* I bought the ticket.
I have had the ticket *for* three months.

Y como Pachanga ya ha dicho, nunca se dice 'It is three months...' en este contexto.


----------



## mariente

No, ¿por qué no puede ser it is 3 months since I bought the ticket?


----------



## pachanga7

Ivy, gracias por la corrección. 

mariente, yo diría 

Vosotros (pero yo no sé bien estas formas del verbo--haís? se las usa en Argentina, ¿verdad?) sido un gran público/público magnífico. 

Y sobre el 'it is three months since' bueno, ya dije que es una regla no más.  Es decir, lo puedes usar pero la gente en la onda pensará que hablas mal el inglés, je je.


----------



## mariente

pachanga7 said:


> Ivy, gracias por la corrección.
> 
> mariente, yo diría
> 
> Vosotros (pero yo no sé bien estas formas del verbo--haís? se las usa en Argentina, ¿verdad?) sido un gran público/público magnífico.
> 
> Y sobre el 'it is three months since' bueno, ya dije que es una regla no más. Es decir, lo puedes usar pero la gente en la onda pensará que hablas mal el inglés, je je.


Ok, entonces it is three months digamos que está mal entonces


----------



## mazbook

mariente said:


> No, ¿por qué no puede ser it is 3 months since I bought the ticket?


¡Porque me sueña mal!   En realidad, creo es la confusión entre presente —is— y pasado —bought— que causa la frase sonar mal.  Ejemplo —It has been 3 months since I bought the ticket.— usa el participio pasado —been— y verbo en pasado —bought— y lo sueña muy bien.  

Sólo mi idea.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

Pero.. ¿cual sería la regla?


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:

No soy gramático, soy editor, pero no creo que una regla exista.  Pero en la mayoría de los casos, cuando se tiene una oración que tiene dos o más frases, está incorrecto para usar los tiempos diferentes para conjugación de los verbos. ¡Cierto! puede hallar muchos ejemplos que no usan esta regla pero si usa esta regla, normalamente tiene razón.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## Ivy29

mazbook said:


> Hola mariente:
> 
> No soy gramático, soy editor, pero no creo que una regla exista. Pero en la mayoría de los casos, cuando se tiene una oración que tiene dos o más frases, está incorrecto para usar los tiempos diferentes para conjugación de los verbos. ¡Cierto! puede hallar muchos ejemplos que no usan esta regla pero si usa esta regla, normalamente tiene razón.
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


 
Mazbook, Oxford trae esta oracion :

Unit 241 3a note after *it is time* we use the unreal past:

it is time I *got* my hair cut.
It is time for tea
it is time to get the tea ready.

*Gary behaves as he owened/owns the place.* 

Ivy29


----------



## roxcyn

The Simple Past Tense is used:

a) to express an action wholly completed at some point, or during some period, *in the past*.

Peter *arrived* at our house yesterday.
I *went* to the cinema last night.

The simple past tense is usual with words or phrases that are time indicators, *yesterday, last week, in 1980*, or when the sentence is a question about time:

When *did* you go there?  What time *was* it when you arrived?

b) in some conditional sentences and senteces expression a supposition:

If Henry *worked* he would pass the exam.
I'd rather you *told* me the truth.  
It would be better if you *went* there yourself.

Notice in all these sentences the past tense form indicates frequently both present and future time.  The past tense form in these cases *is not used to indicate time at all but rather suppositions* implying non-fulfillment or desirability and would be more correctly described as Past Subjunctive.  It indicates that the subordinate clause does not express a fact.  This is known as the Modal Preterite.  This modal preterite is also used in the principal clause but only with the preterites of can, may and will (could, might, would):

He *could* tell you a story that would make you cry! 
You *might* give the fellow a chance; he's doing the best he can!


The present perfect tense is made by using the present tense of the verb *to have* and a past participle.  The interrogative, as with all perfect tenses, is formed by inversion of *have* and the subject; the negative by the addition of not:

Affirmative: George *has eaten* all his sweets.
Interrogative: *Has* George *eaten* all his sweets?
Negative: George *has not* (*hasn't*) *eaten* all his sweets.

The present perfect tense, though it indicates an action that took place in the past, is associated with the present idea of NOW:

I *have* never *met* your sister (Up to now).
I *have studied* all the documents in this case.  (So now I am fully informed on the matter)
We *have bought* our yearly stock of coal. (So now our cellar is full; now we are all right for the winter).

The Present Perfect Tense is used:

(I) For an action just concluded when the resulting state is still present:

I *have lost* my pen; I am unable to do my homework!
He *has unlocked* the door; there is nothing to prevent you from going out.
This watch was working all right a moment ago but now it *has stopped*.

With activities completed in the immediate past, *just* is often used:

The mail has *just* come.  

Note that though *just* is an adverbial of the present, *just now* (a little time ago) is an adverbial of the past and the verb used with it will be a Past Tense:

The mail *came* just now.

(2) For duration of an action or of absence of an action begun in the past and continuing to the present (and possibly in the future):

I *have not visited* him for ten years.  
I *have taught* this class for ten years (and am still teaching it).

Compare this with:

I *taught* this class for ten years (but no longer teach it).

(3) When the time of the action is indefinite:

I *have seen* this movie before.

Compare this with:

I *saw* it last January when it was first shown in London.  

Note the difference in meaning suggested by the following two sentences:

Present Perfect: *Have* you *seen* Sir Laurence Oliver's productions of Titus Andronicus?  (The production is still running).

Past tense: *Did* you *see* Sir Laurence....?  (The production is no longer running)

There are some words or phrases or constructions that are usually associated with the Present Perfect Tense.  Thus the verb in the sentences modified by phrases or clauses beginning with *since* is almost always in the Present Perfect:

He has been here *since* two o'clock/yesterday/Tuesday/1980
They have not visited us *since* Henry went to France.

This tense is usual with *already*:

I have *already* explained that!

With the adverbs of Frequency>
He has *often/never/always *done that!
Have you *ever* hear of such a thing?

And with the words: *now, today, this week/month/year, up to now, up to the present, so far, not yet, lately*.

The Present Perfect is used with *ever* and *never* if they have the meaning *"at any time up to now"*.  With other meanings almost any tense can be used.  

But the exclamatory setence: Did you ever hear  of such a thing!  has the  past tense.  

The Present Perfect is *not used with*: 
ago (I received your letter two days ago)
then
at that time
Yesterday
last week/month/year
in 1980
at Christmas

This morning, this afternoon, this evening can be used with a Present Perfect or a Past Tense depending on the time the statement is made:

I *have written* two letters this morning (said during the morning)
I *wrote* two letters this morning (said in the afternoon or evening).


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> Mazbook, Oxford trae esta oracion :
> 
> Unit 241 3a note after *it is time* we use the unreal past:
> 
> it is time I *got* my hair cut.
> It is time for tea
> it is time to get the tea ready.
> 
> *Gary behaves as he owened/owns the place.*
> 
> Ivy29


 LEs hago una pregunta: si quiero decir: me había olvidado de eso. ¿cómo dirían?: I had forgotten --> porque ahora me acuerdo. O
           I had forgotten --> porque no hay referencia de tiempo.
El tema es que una accion terminada en el pasado.


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:

Su ejemplo, "I had forgotten..." es el tiempo "past perfect". A menudo, usamos este tiempo para decir eventos pasados como "Yesterday, I went to the grocery store but I *had* forgotten my shopping list."

Hoy, en el mercado: "Oh no, I *have* forgotten my shopping list." en el tiempo "present perfect" o lo que es más común: "...I *forgot* my..." en el tiempo "past" (pretérito).

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

mariente said:


> LEs hago una pregunta: si quiero decir: me había olvidado de eso. ¿cómo dirían?: I had forgotten --> porque ahora me acuerdo. O
> I have forgotten --> porque no hay referencia de tiempo.
> El tema es que una accion terminada en el pasado.


 
Creo que no se entendió lo que quise decir.
A ver con un ejemplo

a: sabes que x?
b: aah cierto! me había olvidado--> me había olvidado, pero ahora me acuerdo, porque vos me hiciste acordar, era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste. Entonces.. qué tiempo verbal??


----------



## heidita

mariente said:


> a: sabes que x?
> b: aah cierto! me había olvidado--> me había olvidado, pero ahora me acuerdo, porque vos me hiciste acordar, era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste. Entonces.. qué tiempo verbal??


 
a) You know ....?
b) Oh, I had forgotten all about it! But now I remember......

En este caso se usaría el* past perfect*.


----------



## mariente

Gracias, sí, a eso me refería, eso me suponía.


----------



## alicatado

Hola Mariente,

As others have written the present perfect is used to connect a past action with the present moment, making it relevant to the present situation.

Typically "for" is used with the present perfect and the past to express a duration of time while "since" is used with the present perfect to make reference to a specific time in the past.

As well, when you use he present perfect the implication is that the action continues or the result of the action still has an affect on the present.


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Creo que no se entendió lo que quise decir.
> A ver con un ejemplo
> 
> a: sabes que x?
> b: aah cierto! me había olvidado--> me había olvidado, pero ahora me acuerdo, porque vos me hiciste acordar, era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste. Entonces.. qué tiempo verbal??


 
*I have forgotten it , but now I recall... you made me recollect something I knew and I didn't think back until you did help me to.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten it , but now I recall... you made me recollect something I knew and I didn't think back until you did helped me to.
> 
> Ivy29


 
The tense used here is not correct. It should be 

*I had forgotten.*

_do _can be used for emphasis, but it would sound highly irregular here.


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> The tense used here is not correct. It should be
> 
> *I had forgotten.*
> 
> _do _can be used for emphasis, but it would sound highly irregular here.


 
El presente perfecto en Inglés es correcto, el pretérito perfecto en Inglés se usa cuando es algo pasado de otro pasado. Did enfático también es correcto.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> The tense used here is not correct. It should be
> 
> *I had forgotten.*
> 
> _do _can be used for emphasis, but it would sound highly irregular here.


 
PRESENTE perfect for Azar's English grammar, it expresses the idea that something happened or never happened BEFORE now, at an unspecified time in the past. The exact time it happened IS NO IMPORTANT.
In my sentence NOW I recall... is related to the present. So it is correct.

PAST PERFECT= according to Azar's It expresses an activity that was completed before another activity or time in the past. All the timing is into the past. In my sentence there is a reference to the present NOW I RECALL. 

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy, the act of_ forgetting_ happened *at a fixed time in the past*. The act of _recalling _has reference_ to the present_, but not the forgetting bit. 

I am afraid, present perfect is not correct here. 

Let's wait for natives, even though what natives say might be of no interest to some, it is for others.


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> The tense used here is not correct. It should be
> 
> *I had forgotten.*
> 
> _do _can be used for emphasis, but it would sound highly irregular here.


 
It would be interesting that you read : OXFORD GUIDE to English grammar to brush up about EMPHATIC usage of verb forms. UNIT 51, number 2.
I did post the letter. I am absolutely certain, Also for emphasis ><<<says the author, by using adverbs as really, indeed, certainly and definitely.
the garden really *DOES* look nice.>>>>
If you are against these authors Azar's and OXFORD write down your arguments against *THEIRS*.

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> It would be interesting that you read : OXFORD GUIDE to English grammar to brush up about EMPHATIC usage of verb forms. UNIT 51, number 2.
> I did post the letter. I am absolutely certain, Also for emphasis ><<<says the author, by using adverbs as really, indeed, certainly and definitely.
> the garden really *DOES* look nice.>>>>
> If you are against these authors Azar's and OXFORD write down your arguments against *THEIRS*.
> 
> Ivy29


 
It is always a good idea to brush up knowledge, therefore I would like to remind you again, that screaming is not allowed on the forum!


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> Ivy, the act of_ forgetting_ happened *at a fixed time in the past*. The act of _recalling _has reference_ to the present_, but not the forgetting bit.
> *It seems you have a biased MIND about the sources of my books. Why don't you write down your grammatical arguments against them???*
> 
> I am afraid, present perfect is not correct here.
> 
> Let's wait for natives, even though what natives say might be of no interest to some, it is for others.


 
*The past time is used when there is a mention of SPECIFIC marker of past yesterday, two years ago, last, week, last month etc. These are the words of my authors.*

Ivy29


----------



## elroy

The present perfect would be wrong in this instance.  Only a non-native would use it.

The two options are the past perfect ("had forgotten") or the past simple ("forgot").

1.) _I had forgotten all about it, but now I remember!_
2.) _I forgot all about it, but now I remember!_

1. is better than 2., but you will hear 2.

What you will never hear (except from non-natives) is the following:

3.) _I have forgotten all about it, but now I remember!  _

The forgetting in this case _did_ occur before another past action, namely your mentioning it to me.

_I *forgot* about it._
_You *mentioned *it._
_I *had forgotten* about it until you *mentioned *it._

"Now I remember" because you have jogged my memory by mentioning it.  "Do" is not necessary.  

"Until you did help me to" (in Ivy's sentence) is also something no native would say.  There is no reason for emphasis.


----------



## Ivy29

elroy said:


> The present perfect would be wrong in this instance. Only a non-native would use it.
> 
> The two options are the past perfect ("had forgotten") or the past simple ("forgot").
> 
> 1.) _I had forgotten all about it, but now I remember!_
> 2.) _I forgot all about it, but now I remember!_
> 
> _This is against Azar's Grammar book, and all my grammar books where they stated clearly that present perfect is used when something happened before related to the present ( now I recall). By the way Azar's is a native and an author well known in the English speaking world._
> _*According to Raymond murphy (UK) 'English grammar in use'* unit 7-8 the present perfect is always used when there is a connection with NOW. The action in the past has a result now : " he told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I can't remmeber it now) Is sally here? no, she has gone out ( she is out now). The present perfect is used to GIVE NEW INFORMATION Ow! I have cut my finger. The road is closed there's been an accident. (NEWS ) the police have arrested two men in connection with the robbery. In my sentence *I recall now*..._
> 
> 1. is better than 2., but you will hear 2.
> 
> What you will never hear (except from non-natives) is the following:
> 
> 3.) _I have forgotten all about it, but now I remember!  _
> _*Then you must write my authors and tell them they are teaching us these stupidities.*_
> 
> The forgetting in this case _did_ occur before another past action, namely your mentioning it to me.
> 
> _I *forgot* about it._
> _You *mentioned *it._
> _I *had forgotten* about it until you *mentioned *it._
> 
> "Now I remember" because you have jogged my memory by mentioning it. "Do" is not necessary.
> *I hope NOW means NOW.*
> 
> "Until you did help me to" (in Ivy's sentence) is also something no native would say. There is no reason for emphasis.


*OF course there is a reason* *( I must emphasize that he really made me remember something important to me). It would be nice of you to tell them my authors they are teaching things not used by the natives ( hoping they are natives and knowledgeable about their jobs to teach foreigners). *
*Hoping you DO NOT delete this post because the truth of my authors raise blisters to someones.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## elroy

Don't worry; I don't delete posts that contradict me.  Otherwise, how would I refute the arguments therein?  

Why don't you write the authors and ask them if your sentence is correct?  I don't need to write them because I'm sure it's wrong.


----------



## fenixpollo

Ivy29 said:


> It would be interesting that you read : OXFORD GUIDE to English grammar to brush up about EMPHATIC usage of verb forms. UNIT 51, number 2.
> I did post the letter. I am absolutely certain, Also for emphasis ><<<says the author, by using adverbs as really, indeed, certainly and definitely.
> the garden really *DOES* look nice.>>>>


 You are definitely correct about the grammar, Ivy, and I don't doubt your source at all. However, you are relying too heavily on grammar books in this case.


Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten it , but now I recall... you made me recollect something I knew and I didn't think back until you did help me to.


  This sentence is illogical. I have forgotten it -- therefore, I do not recall.  As soon as I remember it, then I have not forgotten it anymore.  I had forgotten it, until you told me.  

As heidita pointed out, you cannot remember and forget something simultaneously. By using the present perfect (have forgotten), you're referring to this moment _and_ the moments before it.





			
				Ivy said:
			
		

> If you are against these authors Azar's and OXFORD write down your arguments against *THEIRS*.


 I understand that you might be upset that people (including native speakers) are contradicting you, but there's no need to go against the collegial spirit of the forum by using capital letters to shout at us.


----------



## emma42

The first clause must be in the pluperfect:

*I had forgotton all about it, but now I remember.

*If you write "I have forgotton all about it, but now I remember" you are saying that you are in a state of forgetting and remembering at the same time!  

I can see where the confusion has come from - We don't usually say "I forget" unless we are talking about forgetting things on a regular basis, so "I forget things nowadays - perhaps it's my age".

"I have forgotton" is used to describe a present state of having forgotton something specific, so "I would like to talk to that man over there, but I have forgotton his name".


----------



## mariente

Ojo! lo de ahora me acuerdo es una acotación que se da por sentada dada la naturaleza de la oración: me había olvidado!. No tengo referencia de tiempo, esta misma oración en español me da entender que ahora sí me acuerdo porque me hiciste acordar, pero no porque haya que decir que ahora me acuerdo. Se entiende?
Por el momento entonces vengo deduciendo que va el past perfect


----------



## Rayines

mariente said:


> Ojo! lo de ahora me acuerdo es una acotación que se da por sentada dada la naturaleza de la oración: me había olvidado!. No tengo referencia de tiempo, esta misma oración en español me da entender que ahora sí me acuerdo porque me hiciste acordar, pero no porque haya que decir que ahora me acuerdo. Se entiende?
> Por el momento entonces vengo deduciendo que va el past perfect


Hola Mariente: pero recordá que en español usamos mucho más seguido este pluscuamperfecto, sin el sentido estricto que le dan en inglés al Past Perfect. Justamente decimos: _Ah!, me había olvidado (de decirte), la otra noche llamó Fulano...._, donde creo que en inglés, tal vez usarían _I forgot, _o hasta _I have forgotten (to tell you)....._Hmm..., no sé....


----------



## heidita

Rayines said:


> Hola Mariente: pero recordá que en español usamos mucho más seguido este pluscuamperfecto,* sin el sentido estricto que le dan en inglés al Past Perfect.* Justamente decimos: _Ah!, me había olvidado (de decirte), la otra noche llamó Fulano...._, donde creo que en inglés, tal vez usarían _I forgot, _o hasta _I have forgotten (to tell you)....._Hmm..., no sé....


 
Esto es cierto en otros casos, no en el que nos concierne. Los tiempos no coinciden siempre. 
De hecho en el caso que describe Rayines, usaría _present perfect_.

I have forgotten to tell you...I forgot to tell you....


----------



## mariente

Creo que no se entiende, basicamente porque me cambiaron el ejemplo.
Y en mi ejemplo? o sea,NO es que yo me olvidé de decirte algo.

Es algo que yo sabía pero que no me acordaba, me acordé cuando la persona me lo dijo.


----------



## mariente

emma42 said:


> The first clause must be in the pluperfect:
> 
> *I had forgotton all about it, but now I remember.
> 
> *If you write "I have forgotton all about it, but now I remember" you are saying that you are in a state of forgetting and remembering at the same time!
> 
> I can see where the confusion has come from - We don't usually say "I forget" unless we are talking about forgetting things on a regular basis, so "I forget things nowadays - perhaps it's my age".
> 
> "I have forgotton" is used to describe a present state of having forgotton something specific, so "I would like to talk to that man over there, but I have forgotton his name".


Jamás en mi vida vi ni lei ni escuché fogott*O*n. Qué significa forgott*o*n? No será forgott*e*n? En 22 años de inglés nunca escuché ni leí forgotton. Ni en peliculas, ni en textos en ingles ni nada, de hecho ni siqueira en el diccionario


----------



## heidita

mariente said:


> Creo que no se entiende, basicamente porque me cambiaron el ejemplo.?????Y en mi ejemplo? o sea,NO es que yo me olvidé de decirte algo.
> 
> Es algo que yo sabía pero que no me acordaba, me acordé cuando la persona me lo dijo.


 
Es lo que se te ha contestado. Los nativos todos coinciden en que se usa *past perfect.*


----------



## elroy

Es una errata.  Lo correcto es efectivamente "forgott*e*n."


----------



## mariente

Listo gracias, eso quería saber: conclusión past perfect
Thank you


----------



## emma42

So sorry!  Of course it's *forgotten.*


----------



## .   1

I have forgotten something is a way of saying that I forgot something quite recently.
I 'had' forgotten something is a set up clause and is always followed by 'but' or 'yet' or 'so' to explain the outcome.
Had alerts the listener that there is a second shoe to fall, that consequences flowed from the set up clause.
In this case it is simply that a memory has been revived. Something (the loss of memory) had occurred in the past but now that lack (of memory)has been rectified.
Perhaps this is the point that is confusing the text books. This discussion involves the concept of the return of a missing thing, something that once existed then did not exist now re-exists. It could be seen to be a reversion of the normal flow of discussion in these matters. There are some heated and passionate arguments for both have and had and were I a non native speaker I would be thoroughly confused.
It is devistatingly difficult to explain that English is a most complex language that lacks consistent rules. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that English exists at all. It should have been swamped by other languages many times but it prospered by borrowing words and phrases from other languages.
I learned the 'have -v- had' distinction at my parents' knees. I hear non Native speakers switch have and had all the time. It is so prevalent that it is a major marker of a non Native speaker.
I am sorry to say that I do not think I can give any more clarity and that I must lamely finish with the poor advice that you must simply memorise this word pattern.
But now I remember is preceded by I had forgotten.

.,,


----------



## Rayines

mariente said:


> Creo que no se entiende, basicamente porque me cambiaron el ejemplo.
> Y en mi ejemplo? o sea,NO es que yo me olvidé de decirte algo.
> 
> Es algo que yo sabía pero que no me acordaba, me acordé cuando la persona me lo dijo.


Perdón por haberlo cambiado . Es que el hilo es tan largo, que me *había olvidado* de la pregunta original, cuando *comencé* a contestarlo.


----------



## emma42

. said:


> .
> _ I 'had' forgotten something is a set up clause and is always followed by 'but' or 'yet' or 'so' to explain the outcome.
> _
> This is not correct.  "I had forgotton" does not have to be followed by "but or yet or so".  Some examples:
> 
> *Had we arranged to go out tonight?  I had forgotton.
> 
> She asked me if I had brought the book, but I had forgotton.
> 
> I had forgotton to lock the door.*


----------



## .   1

Ivy29 said:


> *I have forgotten it , but now I recall... you made me recollect something I knew and I didn't think back until you did help me to.*
> 
> *Ivy29*


*I have forgotten (had forgotten or forgot) it , but now I recall... you made  helped me recollect  remember something I knew and I didn't think back  recollect until you did help  helped me to.*



heidita said:


> The tense used here is not correct. It should be
> 
> *I had forgotten.*
> 
> _do _can be used for emphasis, but it would sound highly irregular here.


Do can be used for emphasis in pretty much the same way as now is used.
Now is an obviously redundant word when viewed logically but is used to give emphasis to the fact that the memory has been regained and a substitution of do for now leaves the same sentence content.
I had forgotten but now I remember.
I had forgotten but I do remember.

.,,


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> *I have forgotten (had forgotten or forgot) it , but now I recall... you made  helped me recollect  remember something I knew and I didn't think back  recollect until you did help  helped me to.*
> 
> Do can be used for emphasis in pretty much the same way as now is used.
> Now is an obviously redundant word when viewed logically but is used to give emphasis to the fact that the memory has been regained and a substitution of do for now leaves the same sentence content.
> I had forgotten but now I remember.
> I had forgotten but I do remember.
> 
> .,,


 
*The past perfect is against the definition of my books in my sentence*.
May I ask you why the prersent perfect is not used, a grammatical reason??
*Why don't you like he made me to recall ???.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## mariente

Ivy lo que pasa es que un pasado real dentro de otro pasado. 
Me habia olvidado, no es lo mismo que decir me he olvidado


----------



## heidita

elroy said:


> 1.) _I had forgotten all about it, but now I remember!_
> 2.) _I forgot all about it, but now I remember!_
> 
> The forgetting in this case _did_ occur before another past action, namely your mentioning it to me.
> 
> _I *forgot* about it._
> _You *mentioned *it._
> _I *had forgotten* about it until you *mentioned *it._


 


emma42 said:


> The first clause must be in the pluperfect:
> 
> *I had forgotten all about it, but now I remember.*
> 
> If you write "I have forgotten all about it, but now I remember" you are saying that you are in a state of forgetting and remembering at the same time!


 


Ivy29 said:


> May I ask you why the present perfect is not used, a grammatical reason??


 
This question has been answered by several natives and non-natives already (see above).

*



			Why don't you like he made me to recall ???.
		
Click to expand...

* 

You cannot use: to recall

He made me remember.
He made me recall.



> *make*
> to force, induce or cause someone to do something Example: Please don't make me go Example: He makes me laugh.


----------



## emma42

The grammatical reason has already been explained.  You can't be in a state of forgetting and remembering_ at the same time._  Does your grammar book use the verb "to forget" in the definitions you have been reading?  Grammar books can't include everything.

*He made me to recall *is unsatisfactory in two ways.  Firstly, in English we leave out the "to" when we use the infinitive in this way.  Secondly, "recall"  is more literary/more old-fashioned than the much more common "remember".


----------



## Ivy29

elroy said:


> Don't worry; I don't delete posts that contradict me. Otherwise, how would I refute the arguments therein?
> 
> Why don't you write the authors and ask them if your sentence is correct? I don't need to write them because I'm sure it's wrong.


 
What I have read so far yours are against their statements all of them.
You are the one that should write them, You're opposing their statements. Not me. And doing so it would be in all the non-natives's interest to learn English properly and redeem us to learn something incorrectly.
Do you have a grammatical reason why I couldn't use the *present perfect* if it relates to the present or now of the subject.???

Ivy29


----------



## emma42

Ivy, I can assure you, as a native English speaker of 43 years that the advice you have been given by Elroy, heidita and me is correct.  Also, it would be very nice if you could modify your tone and keep the forum "cordial".  This is not a personal argument, it is an argument about grammar.


----------



## mariente

Mirá es igual que en español. Es un pasado dentro de otro pasado.
Fijate la situación.
Presente perfect no puede ser porque no es una acción incompleta en el pasado, no es una experiencia, no es una acción reciente, ni es una acción que tenga consecuencias en el presente. Esas son las reglas del present perfect. No se ajusta.
El past perfect en cambio, es  pasado antes del pasado normal. Una acción anterior.
Había pasado algo, de lo cual yo me había olvidado pero vos me la hiciste acordar así que fijate el dialogo nada mas

a: sabias que X?
b: aaaah cierto!! me habia olvidado. ---> En el presente y en el pasado yo no recordaba este suceso, hasta que me hiciste acordar. Entonces, hoy me acuerdo gracias a que me hiciste acordar.

​


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, I can assure you, as a native English speaker of 43 years that the advice you have been given by Elroy, heidita and me is correct. Also, it would be very nice if you could modify your tone and keep the forum "cordial". This is not a personal argument, it is an argument about grammar.


 
Yes but I have read differently, I'am sure it is not personal, because I didn't write the British and American grammar books.
Give me if you wish a grammatical REASON why I cannot use the present pefect if the subject has a reference to the present or now = I recall now.
<<*He told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I cannot remember it now)* ( is it INCORREDCT) >>??
I have spoken my language too , and daily I make some mistakes or have an improper perception of my vernacular language ( Spanish).

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

emma42 said:


> Ivy, I can assure you, as a native English speaker of 43 years that the advice you have been given by Elroy, heidita and me is correct. Also, it would be very nice if you could modify your tone and keep the forum "cordial". This is not a personal argument, it is an argument about grammar.


 
Thank you emma for pointing this out. (we may not forget the other many natives and non-natives who have participated with these 101 posts!)

The answer has been given. Present perfect is not correct and no grammar book would say otherwise. Past Perfect is used for an action taking place before another action in the past. This is exactly what is happening in the sentence given. 

Ivy, we might take into account your limited knowledge of English, but we would like you to appreciate and accept the advice given by natives who must know better. 

I do think that sometimes natives (in any language) do not stick to the rules, but this is not the case here.


----------



## .   1

G'day Ivy,
Do you have any reason to suspect that every native English speaker has given virtually the same information to you in order to irritate you or for a malicious purpose?
I was invited to come here to try to clarify the situation and after reading the tone of the thread I would not have contributed had I not been asked to do so.
You run a great risk of damaging your ability to progress as a student of English by refusing to accept the accuracy of so many varied native speakers.  Have and has are very tricky and my best advice to you is to take note of the advice being offered here.
English is not a logical or homogenous language and the rules of English are not without exceptions.

*



The past perfect is against the definition of my books in my sentence.
May I ask you why the prersent perfect is not used, a grammatical reason??
		
Click to expand...

*Had is used as it is clearly past tense and there is no confusion with the fact that the memory has been regained.


*



Why don't you like he made me to recall ???.

Click to expand...

* 
For the same reason that I don't like he made me to run or he made me to hide.

This is so weird because I would say he caused me to recall or he caused me to run or he caused me to hide.

It must be frustratingly tricky to learn English.
.,,


----------



## mariente

o sea
1) pasó x
2) después me olvidé
3)hoy no me acuerdo de x
4)entonces b me pregunta si se que 1) , 1=X, que es la primera acción del pasado y la pregunta hace referencia a ese hecho.
5) me  olvidé 
6) cuando a me pregunta yo ya me me habia olvidado de 1). O sea, ahi tenes la otra acción en el pasado, el hecho de haberme olvidado, en el pasado próximo yo no recuerdo que x (o sea 1). Por lo tanto el haberme olvidado es una acción anterior al pasado proximo que es que ya no me acuerdo. Mi presente me retrotrae a ese pasado anterior, si en español digo: me habia olvidado y vos lo dirías así, bueno, en inglés es igual!


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> <<<<*He told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I cannot remember it now)* ( is it INCORRECT)????.--> CORRECT!!
> 
> 
> Please answer?? the sentence in Blue above is it incorrect???
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## elroy

Ivy29 said:


> Give me if you wish a grammatical REASON why I cannot use the present pefect if the subject has a reference to the present or now = I recall now.


 Herein lies the problem, or at least one of them.

Yes, I *recall/remember it* now, but the period of *forgetfulness* is over. 

As soon as you remember something, you may no longer say "I have forgotten it." "I have forgotten it" necessarily implies that you have not yet remembered it after forgetting it. 

_-What is that guy's name?_
_-I don't know. I've forgotten it._ (American English: _I forgot it.)_

The above statement *always* means that I still cannot remember the name. 

Once you remember something, you may no longer say "have forgotten"; you must say "had forgotten." 

Think of it this way:

-----------------------x------------------------NOW
(I remember the name) *F *(I do not remember the name)

*I have forgotten the name.*
*_______________________________________________________*

-----------------------x------------------------------x------------------NOW
(I remember the name) *F* (I do not remember the name) *R* (I remember the name)

*I had forgotten the name, but I remember it now. *
*_______________________________________________________*

In the above diagrams, *F* repreesents the moment at which I forgot the name, and *R *represents the moment at which I remembered it again. The part in blue represents the time period during which I can/could not recall the name. *If the present moment pertains to that time period, I may say "have forgotten." If not, I must say "had forgotten" because that time period is a thing of the past.*

Once again, as soon as you remember something you may no longer say "I have forgotten it."


----------



## elroy

Ivy29 said:


> <<<<*He told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I cannot remember it now)* ( is it INCORRECT)????.


   This is a perfectly correct sentence, because I still don't remember the name.


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> G'day Ivy,
> Do you have any reason to suspect that every native English speaker has given virtually the same information to you in order to irritate you or for a malicious purpose?
> I was invited to come here to try to clarify the situation and after reading the tone of the thread I would not have contributed had I not been asked to do so.
> You run a great risk of damaging your ability to progress as a student of English by refusing to accept the accuracy of so many varied native speakers. Have and has are very tricky and my best advice to you is to take note of the advice being offered here.
> English is not a logical or homogenous language and the rules of English are not without exceptions.
> 
> so you don't like these either :
> <<*3.* [cause to be, cause to do]* hacer*
> it makes me seem fatter me hace parecer más gordo
> it makes me sick me pone enfermo
> it makes me want to ... me da ganas de ...
> it made him angry hizo que se enfadara
> you made me jump! ¡vaya susto que me has dado!
> we were made to wait in the hall nos hicieron esperar en el vestíbulo
> to make somebody happy hacer a alguien feliz
> to make somebody sad entristecer a alguien
> to make somebody nervous poner nervioso a alguien
> to make o.s. heard hacerse oír
> don't make me laugh! ¡no me hagas reír!>>>
> 
> * Do you like them or not???*
> 
> 
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## elroy

Ivy, "made to do" is correct in some instances but not in others.  In your sentence, it was incorrect.  

Your question has been answered by two people so far.


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> . said:
> 
> 
> 
> G'day Ivy,
> Do you have any reason to suspect that every native English speaker has given virtually the same information to you in order to irritate you or for a malicious purpose?
> I was invited to come here to try to clarify the situation and after reading the tone of the thread I would not have contributed had I not been asked to do so.
> You run a great risk of damaging your ability to progress as a student of English by refusing to accept the accuracy of so many varied native speakers. Have and has are very tricky and my best advice to you is to take note of the advice being offered here.
> English is not a logical or homogenous language and the rules of English are not without exceptions.
> 
> so you don't like these either :
> <<*3.* [cause to be, cause to do]* hacer*
> it makes me seem fatter me hace parecer más gordo
> it makes me sick me pone enfermo
> it makes me want to ... me da ganas de ...
> it made him angry hizo que se enfadara
> you made me jump! ¡vaya susto que me has dado!
> we were made to wait in the hall nos hicieron esperar en el vestíbulo
> to make somebody happy hacer a alguien feliz
> to make somebody sad entristecer a alguien
> to make somebody nervous poner nervioso a alguien
> to make o.s. heard hacerse oír
> don't make me laugh! ¡no me hagas reír!>>>
> 
> *First, Do you like them or not???*
> 
> *secondly, nobody has answered me  if this sentence is correct or not:*
> 
> *<<He told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I cannot remember it now)>>>>
> 
> 
> *Ivy29
> 
> 
> 
> Esta todo bien
Click to expand...


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> 3.[/b] [cause to be, cause to do]* hacer*
> it makes me seem fatter me hace parecer más gordo
> it makes me sick me pone enfermo
> it makes me want to ... me da ganas de ...
> it made him angry hizo que se enfadara
> you made me jump! ¡vaya susto que me has dado!
> we were made to wait in the hall nos hicieron esperar en el vestíbulo
> to make somebody happy hacer a alguien feliz
> to make somebody sad entristecer a alguien
> to make somebody nervous poner nervioso a alguien
> to make o.s. heard hacerse oír
> don't make me laugh! ¡no me hagas reír!>>>



Will you do us the favour and check your own sentence? You said "made me to recall", the to is not correct.




> First, Do you like them or not???


 
First and above all, change your tone!





> secondly, nobody has answered me if this sentence is correct or not:





> <<He told me his name but I have forgotten it ( I cannot remember it now)>>>>


 
Second, this has been answered by elroy.


----------



## mariente

heidita said:


> Second, this has been answered by elroy.


And by me


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> so made me (caused)to recall, I cannot use it but in the rest of the sentences I posted yes. Then, give me a grammatical source that back your *focalized* stance.
> And you still have NOT answered my other question, I do repeat it again :
> 
> <<<*You told me your name but I have forgotten it . ( I cannot remember NOW) , Could you answer this ???*
> 
> *Ivy29*


a: you told me your name but I have forgotten--> me dijiste tu nombre pero lo he olvidado
b: Yes I have  ( I dont remeber it now)
NO entiendo bien cual es tu duda, todos te lo dijimos ya. También esto del to lo encontras en cualquier diccionario, al menos el mio, que es el oxford lo explica y te da ejemplos


----------



## elroy

Ivy29 said:


> so made me (caused)to recall, I cannot use it but in the rest of the sentences I posted yes. Then, give me a grammatical source that back your *focalized* stance.


 I do not need a grammatical source. I speak English as a native language, as you can see in my profile. 

Will you not listen to anyone unless we cite a grammatical source? If so, why do you even bother to come here? Go bury yourself in grammatical tomes and I'm sure you'll be well on your way to speaking the most eloquent and flawless variety of English there is.


> And you still have NOT answered my other question, I do repeat it again :
> 
> <<<*You told me your name but I have forgotten it . ( I cannot remember NOW) , Could you answer this ???*
> 
> *Ivy29 *


 I did answer it. See post #110.


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> a: you told me your name but I have forgotten--> me dijiste tu nombre pero lo he olvidado
> b: Yes I have ( I dont remeber it now)
> NO entiendo bien cual es tu duda, todos te lo dijimos ya. También esto del to lo encontras en cualquier diccionario, al menos el mio, que es el oxford lo explica y te da ejemplos


 
EJEMPLO: me encuentro contigo en la calle y tú me saludas, yo te digo *excusa, me he olvidado de tu nombre*, me lo dices y yo respondo *ahora recuerdo* que un amigo tuyo *me lo hizo recordar la semana pasada*. Gracias a él que me lo recordó.
*Está mal.??*

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> EJEMPLO: me encuentro contigo en la calle y tú me saludas, yo te digo *excusa,  me he olvidado de tu nombre*, me lo dices y yo respondo *ahora recuerdo* que un amigo tuyo *me lo hizo recordar*. Gracias a él que me lo recordó.
> *Está mal.??*
> 
> Ivy29



Mira en el ejemplo anterior que diste que dice i have fogotten todavia seguís sin acordarte el nobre


----------



## mariente

El dialogo original era, y voy a ponerle hechos para ver si lo podés visualizar

A: sabías que Pepito se accidentó?
B: aaahh, cierto!!!, me había olvidado! ¿cómo está?--> past perfect: acción pasada anterior al pasado proximo. 
A: bien, mejor


----------



## emma42

Ivy, you could say "I have forgotton your number [_pause, and then suddenly remember the number_]...now I remember it!"

In this example, you are not simultaneously forgetting and remembering.  There is a lapse of time between the state of forgetting and the sudden remembering.  I hope I have understood your Spanish.


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Mira en el ejemplo anterior que diste que dice i have fogotten todavia seguís sin acordarte el nobre


<<aah cierto! me había olvidado--> me había olvidado, pero ahora me acuerdo, porque vos me hiciste acordar, era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste. Entonces.. qué tiempo verbal??>>>

Esta fue la oración original , como hay una referencia al presente, pienso que el presente perfecto es correcto.

*He olvidado algo ( que tenía que decirte= pasado reciente)pero ahora me acuerdo ya que tú me lo hiciste acordar ( hace un ratito), era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste.*
*Este es mi contexto de la oración de arriba.*
*I have forgotten something, now I recall it... since you made me remember it ( a while ago) it was something I knew but I didn't bring back until you did recall it to me.*

*Lo entiendes ahora.*
*Ivy29*


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, you could say "I have forgotton your number [_pause, and then suddenly remember the number_]...now I remember it!"
> 
> In this example, you are not simultaneously forgetting and remembering. There is a lapse of time between the state of forgetting and the sudden remembering. I hope I have understood your Spanish.


 
That was my point and is still my point, if you read my last post to Mariente, about the original sentence I framed it into Spanish to clarify my using the PRESENT PERFECT with a background of recent past,

Thanks
Ivy29


----------



## emma42

I *had *forgotten something, now I *have recalled *it, since you reminded me about it (a while ago).  It was something I knew, but I didn't remember it until you reminded me about it.

Edit.  You are welcome, Ivy.


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> <<aah cierto! me había olvidado--> me había olvidado, pero ahora me acuerdo, porque vos me hiciste acordar, era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste. Entonces.. qué tiempo verbal??>>>
> 
> Esta fue la oración original , como hay una referencia al presente, pienso que el presente perfecto es correcto.
> 
> *He olvidado algo ( que tenía que decirte= pasado reciente)pero ahora me acuerdo ya que tú me lo hiciste acordar ( hace un ratito), era algo que yo sabía y no me acordaba hasta que me lo dijiste.*
> *Este es mi conmtexto de la oración de arriba.*
> *I have forgotten something, now I recalled it since you made me remember it ( a while ago) it was something I knew but I didn't bring back until you did recall it to me.*
> 
> *Lo entiendes ahora.*
> *Ivy29*



no! porque en el pasado proximo tampoco lo recordabas

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
past perfect        simple  past      present


Past perfect--> en este periodo de tiempo no lo recuerdo   
Simple past--->en este periodo de tiempo tampoco lo recuerdo   
Simple present--> ahora sí lo recuerdo, porque me hiciste acordar
 ​


----------



## mariente

No es necesariamente reciente. Puede ser algo que no te acuerdes de años atrás. Ninguna regla del present perfect se ajusta a la oración original. 
La acción era que me olvidé ...me olvidé en el pasado
Pero qué pasa:
está mal si digo:
A: sabes que x?
b: aaa me olvidé...--> es cierto, te olvidaste
pero que pasa, ahora que te lo dijeron te acordas, entonces ahora te acordaste. No te has olvidado, sino que te habias olvidado, en ese tiempo pasado.


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> no! porque en el pasado proximo tampoco lo recordabas
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> past perfect simple past present​
> 
> Past perfect--> en este periodo de tiempo no lo recuerdo
> Simple past--->en este periodo de tiempo tampoco lo recuerdo
> Simple present--> ahora sí lo recuerdo, porque me hiciste acordar


 
*he olvidado algo* >>>relacionado con el pasado reciente o pasado, ( en castellano es pasado y pasado reciente>>>*comma*, (=PAUSE) ahora recuerdo ( ese algo que tenía que decirte) ya que tú me lo hiciste recordar >>>> 

Present perfect = something I have forgotten related with the moment of utterance, pause (= COMMA) Now I recall it ( ahora lo recuerdo) gracias a que tu me lo hiciste recordar. El orden es claro en español.

*He olvidado algo* (que tenía que decirte)>>>>>> ahora recuerdo ( present)>>> Referring to the present SINCE you made me remember something I knew . 
*He olvidado* ( presente perfect) >>>>>>*Present= now I recall it*>>>>>> reason of my remembering now << you made me remember it sth I knew before now. *PAST*.

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Pero no va present perfect, porque en el momento que lo estás diciendo ya no mas "I have forgotten". Ese I ve forgotten queda interrumpido por el hecho de que ahora lo recordás. Si todavía no lo recordaras si iría present perfect (al momento de decirlo), pero al momento de decirlo, esa acción de "i have forgotten" queda interrumpida porque lo recordaste. Aunque sea una acción reciente, el tema era que vos en el pasado no lo recordaste ni en el pasado remoto ni el proximo, por eso past perfect. Ya hice todo si no lo entendiste, yo me rindo, sugiero que te lo aprendas de memoria, que es lo que hay que hacer cuando algo es dificil de entender


----------



## mazbook

Hola Ivy:

En este caso estoy de acuerdo con todos que dicen "I had forgotten..." es la forma correcta.

Tiene razón muchas veces y yo también aprendí cuando usa las reglas en sus libros de referencia, pero en este caso es *incorrecto.*

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> No es necesariamente reciente. Puede ser algo que no te acuerdes de años atrás. Ninguna regla del present perfect se ajusta a la oración original.
> La acción era que me olvidé ...me olvidé en el pasado
> Pero qué pasa:
> está mal si digo:
> A: sabes que x?
> b: aaa me olvidé...--> es cierto, te olvidaste
> pero que pasa, ahora que te lo dijeron te acordas, entonces ahora te acordaste. No te has olvidado, sino que te habias olvidado, en ese tiempo pasado.


 
PRESENT PERFECT de acuerdo con *Azar* expresa una idea de que algo que sucedió o nunca sucedió antes de AHORA. *He olvidado es una acción de recordar que hasta ahora me olvidé*. The exact time is not important. Aquí no hay una referencia específica del pasado e indica que *HASTA AHORA no me recuerdo*, luego tú me hiciste recordar PASADO para que ME RECUERDE ahora (presente)

PRESENTE PERFECTO >>>>> PRESENTE ( ahora recuerdo gracias a que tu me hiciste recordar PASADO. El *presente* es el RESULTADO del *pasado.*
*Cabe perfectamente en la noción del presente perfecto. En Inglés y Castellano.*

No veo la dificultad .
Había olvidado es un pasado IMPERFECTO cuya acción NO HA terminado por eso es imperfecto.

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Bueno, usa el presente perfecto, pero está mal


----------



## Ivy29

mazbook said:


> Hola Ivy:
> 
> En este caso estoy de acuerdo con todos que dicen "I had forgotten..." es la forma correcta.
> 
> Tiene razón muchas veces y yo también aprendí cuando usa las reglas en sus libros de referencia, pero en este caso es *incorrecto.*
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


 
Mazbook, the only tense related with the moment of utterance ( present) is the present perfect; the PAST PERFECT is placed into the past before another action into the past also. That's what my books say.

PAST PERFECT in the timing line never touches the PRESENT vertical line according to AZAR's diagramming, so for me is IMPOSSIBLE it could refer to the present vertical line if it NEVER touches or reaches it 

Past---*x1----x2*------XPresent--------------Future. Past perfect
x1 action happened first
x2 action happened second.

Or Azar is diagramming something wrong or I cannot logically see what I cannot see with my own eyes in her diagrams.


PRESENTE PERFECT

past------------*x past------xx* present--------------future

it definitely touches the present.


Could you explain me how sth into the past (definitely) as past perfect and past simple touches something into the moment= now present.??

Thanks
Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Traducilo al español! en este caso es lo mismo!


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Traducilo al español! en este caso es lo mismo!


 

En español y en inglés el presente perfecto ( antepresente Bello o *pretérito perfecto compuesto* de la RAE )

el tiempo y sus aspectos son muy distintos.

Y no se traducen igual. Todos los libros de gramática dicen lo mismo, no yo.

Ivy29


----------



## emma42

mariente, are you saying that the verb construction we are all trying so hard to explain is the same in Spanish?!  If so, I can't see why Ivy doesn't understand what we are trying to explain.


----------



## mazbook

Ivy,

When *relating (saying)* (in the present) something that happened in the past, i.e., "I had forgotten...", you *always* use either the past perfect or the simple past.  When you say/write "I had forgotten, but now, you make/have made me recall...", *only* the second clause is in the present/present perfect.  The first clause is absolutely an action that is in the past and no longer in existence.  There really is no connection with the present in this clause, even though you follow it with a clause in the present/present perfect.

I don't know how Azar's diagramming works, but either it is incorrect in this sort of case *or* you are mis-applying it.  I tend to think the latter, since *no* English grammar book would say to use the present perfect in this particular example.  

Perhaps you could break it up into two sentences.  "I had forgotten*.* Now you make me recall."  I think if you were to diagram it this way, you would find that the *past* action in the first sentence doesn't intersect with the *present* action in the second sentence.

Time is fairly well subject to the rules in Spanish, but unfortunately, *not* in English.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

emma42 said:


> mariente, are you saying that the verb construction we are all trying so hard to explain is the same in Spanish?! If so, I can't see why Ivy doesn't understand what we are trying to explain.



To me, it is, but only in this case


----------



## heidita

emma42 said:


> mariente, are you saying that the verb construction we are all trying so hard to explain is the same in Spanish?! If so, I can't see why Ivy doesn't understand what we are trying to explain.


 


mariente said:


> To me, it is, but only in this case


 
No mariente, not only here.


Yes dear Emma, isn't it surprising? The same in Spanish. Actually, almost always the past perfect translates in the exact way as it does in Spanish.

I think it is no good insisting as nobody is as deaf as the one who doesn't want to hear.

Anyway, the question mariente asked has been answered. Mariente has everything clear now, I think, so we might just as well leave it a that.


----------



## heidita

mazbook said:


> Ivy,
> 
> When *relating (saying)* (in the present) something that happened in the past, i.e., "I had forgotten...", you *always* use either the past perfect or the simple past. When you say/write "I had forgotten, but now, you make/have made me recall...", *only* the second clause is in the present/present perfect. The first clause is absolutely an action that is in the past and no longer in existence. There really is no connection with the present in this clause, even though you follow it with a clause in the present/present perfect.
> 
> I don't know how Azar's diagramming works, but either it is incorrect in this sort of case *or* you are mis-applying it. I tend to think the latter, since *no* English grammar book would say to use the present perfect in this particular example.
> 
> Perhaps you could break it up into two sentences. "I had forgotten*.* Now you make me recall." I think if you were to diagram it this way, you would find that the *past* action in the first sentence doesn't intersect with the *present* action in the second sentence.
> 
> Time is fairly well subject to the rules in Spanish, but unfortunately, *not* in English.
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


 
Mazbook, you have probably not read all the thread as it has extended far too long. About ten natives and many others have said exactly the same as you.


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> mariente, are you saying that the verb construction we are all trying so hard to explain is the same in Spanish?! If so, I can't see why Ivy doesn't understand what we are trying to explain.


 
*The verbs FORGET, remember, believe, imagine, doubt, want, need, linking verbs, feel, realize, understand, are STATIVE verbs or non-progressing.*

*I have forgotten sth* ( you forgot it no question, but connected with PRESENT) and much more with past perfect that moves the listener to the PAST  and NO CONNECTION with the present. 
My sentence = he olvidado algo ( I have forgotten sth) and a friend MADE me recall that thing the result into the present is that I remember it now. While the past perfect in its timing remains within the limits of the past not reaching the present. The only past action that relates with or connects with the present is the *present perfect* .
*My sentence fits the conditions* of Azar's, Raymond Murhy, advanced grammar ( Martin Hewings), etc.
It is the first time I have heard that REMEMBERING or FORGETTING pushes the usage of perfect tenses being stative or non-progressive verbs.
I do believe and what I have read in my books that the usage depends on *the connection with the present(NOW) or not*.

Have a good day

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> Mazbook, you have probably not read all the thread as it has extended far too long. About ten natives and many others have said exactly the same as you.


 

<<When *relating (saying)* (in the present) something that happened in the past, i.e., "I had forgotten...", you *always* use either the past perfect or the simple past. When you say/write "I had forgotten, but now, you make/have made me recall...", *only* the second clause is in the present/present perfect. The first clause is absolutely an action that is in the past and no longer in existence. There really is no connection with the present in this clause, even though you follow it with a clause in the present/present perfect.>>

That's clearly against the definition of *present perfect* and PAST PERFECT in my books. The past is not related with the now, it is an action that happened ( the action) and finished into the past. Present perfect is the only one which the *action is past* and relates *with NOW; these * are the definitions of both tenses. *Forgetting sth* you can use the *present perfect*, *past perfect and **simple past* or modals, or future or conditionals, or subjunctive but their usages depends on a very specific characteristics of each one in English and Spanish.
Yo he olvidado algo y ahora lo recuerdo ya que tu me lo hiciste recordar. It is perfect timing in Spanish as well as in English according to my sources (Britons and American authors).
*The timing lines of Azar's are crystal clear.*

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, you could say "I have forgotton your number [_pause, and then suddenly remember the number_]...now I remember it!"
> 
> In this example, you are not simultaneously forgetting and remembering. There is a lapse of time between the state of forgetting and the sudden remembering. I hope I have understood your Spanish.


 
*You dont keep remembering and forgetting they are STATIVE VERBS or non-progressive verbs. You forget sth you forget it. You remember sth you remember it. According to my sources.*
*THE comma is a pause, and besides this  those verbs are STATIVE or non-progressive verbs.*

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> <<When *relating (saying)* (in the present) something that happened in the past, i.e., "I had forgotten...", you *always* use either the past perfect or the simple past. When you say/write "I had forgotten, but now, you make/have made me recall...", *only* the second clause is in the present/present perfect. The first clause is absolutely an action that is in the past and no longer in existence. There really is no connection with the present in this clause, even though you follow it with a clause in the present/present perfect.>>
> 
> That's clearly against the definition of *present perfect* and PAST PERFECT in my books. The past is not related with the now, it is an action that happened ( the action) and finished into in the past. Present perfect is the only tense in which the *action is past* and relates *with NOW; these *are the definitions of both tenses. *Forgetting sth* you can use the *present perfect*, *past perfect and **simple past* or modals, or future or conditionals, or subjunctive but their usages depend on very specific characteristics of each one in English and Spanish.
> Yo he olvidado algo y ahora lo recuerdo ya que tu me lo hiciste recordar. It is perfect timing in Spanish as well as in English according to my sources (Britons and American authors).
> *The timing lines of Azar's are crystal clear.*
> 
> Ivy29


 
Emma, fenixpollo, .,, , elroy, Mazbook ...we all have a lot to learn. English doesn't seem to be our cup of tea.


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> Emma, fenixpollo, .,, , elroy, Mazbook ...we all have a lot to learn. English doesn't seem to be our cup of tea.


 
*That's what my books say*. ( Britons and Americans)
INTO= is correct.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> Emma, fenixpollo, .,, , elroy, Mazbook ...we all have a lot to learn. English doesn't seem to be our cup of tea.


 
*Do not underline my* sentences since I believe it  is a MISGUIDING or leading to thinkings were not in my words. If you have sth to say say it but  don't use this type of attacks. I love the high levels of the MIND.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> I *had *forgotten something, now I *have recalled *it, since you reminded me about it (a while ago). It was something I knew, but I didn't remember it until you reminded me about it.
> 
> Edit. You are welcome, Ivy.


 

*<<I have forgotten something, now I recall it... since you made me remember it ( a while ago) it was something I knew but I didn't bring back until you did recall it to me.>>>*

*Ivy29*


----------



## emma42

Ivy, since you 1) refuse to believe that a well-educated native of English might know English better than you, and 2) have decided to be very rude to people who are trying to help you, I will leave you to your incorrect English.


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> *.*
> 
> 
> My sentence = he olvidado algo ( I have forgotten sth) and a friend MADE me recall that thing the result into the present is that I remember it now. While the past perfect in its timing remains within the limits of the past not
> 
> Have a good day
> 
> Ivy29


Cómo dirías en ingles Ivy: me había olvidado? cómo dirías?


----------



## mariente

emma42 said:


> Ivy, since you 1) refuse to believe that a well-educated native of English might know English better than you, and 2) have decided to be very rude to people who are trying to help you, I will leave you to your incorrect English.


una pregunta no sería mejor decir: i leave with your incorrect english?--> te dejo con tu inglés incorrecto.
De otro modo estarias diciendo se dejo a tu inglés incorrecto o algo sí.
Siempre escuché I leave it to you. --> te lo dejo a tí. I leave it to him--> se lo dejo  él, para el uso del to con el leave. Nunca lo escuché así, explanation please?


----------



## fenixpollo

_I'll leave you with your incorrect English. = I'll leave you to your incorrect English._

Los dos son parecidos o iguales, en mi opinión.  ¿No lo son en español?
_Te dejo con tu inglés incorrecto. = Te dejo a tu inglés incorrecto._

Saludos.


----------



## mariente

aaa ahora así: como te dejo librada a tu inglés incorrecto, verdad?


----------



## emma42

Gracias, fenixpollo.  Estoy de acuerdo.


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, since you 1) refuse to believe that a well-educated native of English might know English better than you, and 2) have decided to be very rude to people who are trying to help you, I will leave you to your incorrect English.


 
Sorry, I'm not rude. I only repeat or post what my books say. Rudness is to UNDERLINE sentences of my posts to misguide or mislead the meaning of my words. That's rudness. I am adult enough, to read what my sources state clearly about something so simple which are the strict usage and meaning of the tenses in English.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Cómo dirías en ingles Ivy: me había olvidado? cómo dirías?


 
I had forgotten= me  había olvidado.
I have forgotten= he olvidado.
If I had forgotten= si me hubiera olvidado.
I would have forgotten= Habría olvidado.
To have forgotten= Haber olvidado.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> aaa ahora así: como te dejo librada a tu inglés incorrecto, verdad?


 
Te dejo libre con tu incorrecto inglés/te dejo con tus errores de inglés.

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> I had forgotten= me  había olvidado.
> 
> 
> Ivy29



Listo, tanto lío para eso! viste que lo sabías!!, es lo mismo que en español!


----------



## emma42

Ivy, could you quote the part of your grammar book which tells you this sentence needs the present perfect, but cannot possibly use the past perfect?  Then, perhaps I can understand better what you are saying.


----------



## .   1

Ivy29 said:


> Sorry, I'm not rude. I only repeat or post what my books say. Rudness is to UNDERLINE sentences of my posts to misguide or mislead the meaning of my words. That's rudness. I am adult enough, to read what my sources state clearly about something so simple which are the strict usage and meaning of the tenses in English.
> 
> Ivy29


There are no strict rules governing meaning and usage of tenses in English.
Do you have any references that specifically say that 'I have forgotten something but now I remember it' is correct English or are you extrapolating?
Not all books are correct.
If you wish to sound eloquent in your English you should use, 'I had forgotten but yada yada yada'.
If you wish to pass an English test you should use, 'I had forgotten but blah blah blah'.

.,,


----------



## mariente

. said:


> There are no strict rules governing meaning and usage of tenses in English.
> Do you have any references that specifically say that 'I have forgotten something but now I remember it is correct English or are you extrapolating?
> Not all books are correct.
> Porque es imposible, I have forgotten es que todavía no me acuerdo.--> unfinished  action.
> If  you wish to sound eloquent in your English you should use, 'I had forgotten but yada yada yada'. Si decís i had forgotten es que ahora sí tea cordas, no te acordabas en el pasado, ahora sí..


----------



## .   1

I am sorry Mariente,
I have no Spanish.
I am a poor limited monolingual English speaker.

.,,


----------



## mariente

I am just explaining to Ivy why the present perfect cannot go in that sentence


----------



## mazbook

Ivy:

If you make it a conditional sentence, i.e., "I have forgotten it but if you can give me a hint, maybe I will remember it." the use of the present perfect is OK.

I think that your confusion derives from the fact that you place the "now" clause as the present time.  *It's NOT!*  Since the person relating it *can* relate it, it is obviously in the *past, *maybe only slightly, but definitely in the past.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## emma42

A good point mazbook.  I would say that the "now" clause starts in the past (the moment of remembering) and then continues into the present (and I am now in a state of remembering, ie knowing).


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Listo, tanto lío para eso! viste que lo sabías!!, es lo mismo que en español!


 
*You could state as you posted before, Emma, I had forgotten something and recalled it because some one made me recalled it. This is correct.*
*Perfect past--------recalled it simple past-----because sb had me recall it.*
*Perfect sequence.*

*But also the sentence I posted* ; I have forgotten, now I recall...you made me remember. Some one got me to remember it with a PRESENT result( now), My point was is, will be that if you have a present result from sth in the past you should use the present perfect. Because the present perfect is connected with present, now. The past perfect operates within the past an :action earlier and other later in the past.

*I was not translating me habia olvidado*. I was using HE OLVIDADO algo, ahora recuerdo.. pues alguien me hizo recordar.

He olvidado is as 'forgotten' as I had forgotten, the first connected with now, the past perfect connected into the past, This tense is called past into the past.

Thanks again 

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

mazbook said:


> Ivy:
> 
> If you make it a conditional sentence, i.e., "I have forgotten it but if you can give me a hint, maybe I will remember it." the use of the present perfect is OK.
> 
> I think that your confusion derives from the fact that you place the "now" clause as the present time. *It's NOT!* Since the person relating it *can* relate it, it is obviously in the *past, *maybe only slightly, but definitely in the past.
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


 
We are getting closer. I have forgotten something It is *past* connected with now, why? because that's the definition of Present perfect, *now I recall it why? * someone had me remembered it, this person caused the result into the present= *Now I recall it. Present, now.*

*Thanks Mazbook for your endeavour, this issue in a warm ambience is vital for all of us.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## Rapek

The Present perfect tense is used to express an action that started in the past but is still happening in the present.
The simple past tense is used to express an action that started in the past but is not happening in the present, an action finished.


----------



## Ivy29

Rapek said:


> The Present perfect tense is used to express an action that started in the past but is still happening in the present.
> The simple past tense is used to express an action that started in the past but is not happening in the present, an action finished.


 

That would be present perfect progressive. 

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> a MISGUIDING or leading to thinkings were not in my words.Ivy29


 
There is only one misguided person on this thread.



emma42 said:


> Ivy, since you 1) refuse to believe that a well-educated native of English might know English better than you, and 2) have decided to be very rude to people who are trying to help you, I will leave you to your incorrect English.


 
Thank you, emma, I think you have put into words what all of us think.



emma42 said:


> Gracias, fenixpollo. Estoy de acuerdo.


 
Emma, I am shocked, ¡hablas español!



Ivy29 said:


> Sorry, I'm not rude.


 
Yes, you are.



> I am adult enough,


 
Is that so?



> to read what my sources state clearly about something so simple which are the strict usage and meaning of the tenses in English.


 
To understand something _so simple_, first you must know the language.




Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten, now I recall...you made me remember.


 
This sentence is incorrect, you have been told.



> I was using HE OLVIDADO algo, ahora recuerdo.. pues alguien me hizo recordar.


 
This Spanish sentence is just as incorrect as the English one.



Ivy29 said:


> We are getting closer.


 
Closer to what? About ten natives and more forers who do speak the language have told you that the use of present perfect is not correct here. It is quite obvious by now that you choose not only not to learn but not even to listen.

I would like to apologize to my English speaking friends.


----------



## Rapek

Maybe I should give an example:
"I have tought ..."
This sentence is an action started in the past, but it doesn't mean that is not anymore.


----------



## emma42

Ivy, if you want to say "I have forgotten" and "now I recall" in the same sentence you would have to have different punctuation or two separate sentences to indicate that there is a period of time in between the state of having forgotten (not knowing, basically) and the state of remembering.  So,

"I have forgotten...NOW I remember!"  The pause in the sentence is vital.  It cannot just be a comma because then there is no time period between the two states.  With a comma, you are stating that you are in a state of forgetting and remembering _at the same time.

_Imagine it as a play with stage directions:

Actor One: [sounding very angry] *Well, where is it?!  Where did you leave it?!

*Actor Two: [he is pacing the room, scratching his head and looking worried]*I have forgotten...*[there is a long pause, during which he appears to be thinking very deeply.  Suddenly, he leaps into the air]*NOW I remember!

*Does this make it any clearer?


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> There is only one misguided person on this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, emma, I think you have put into words what all of us think.
> 
> 
> 
> Emma, I am shocked, ¡hablas español!
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you are.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that so?
> 
> 
> 
> To understand something _so simple_, first you must know the language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This sentence is incorrect, you have been told.
> 
> 
> 
> This Spanish sentence is just as incorrect as the English one.
> 
> 
> 
> Closer to what? About ten natives and more forers who do speak the language have told you that the use of present perfect is not correct here. It is quite obvious by now that you choose not only not to learn but not even to listen.
> 
> I would like to apologize to my English speaking friends.


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, if you want to say "I have forgotten" and "now I recall" in the same sentence you would have to have different punctuation or two separate sentences to indicate that there is a period of time in between the state of having forgotten (not knowing, basically) and the state of remembering. So,
> 
> "I have forgotten...NOW I remember!" The pause in the sentence is vital. It cannot just be a comma because then there is no time period between the two states. With a comma, you are stating that you are in a state of forgetting and remembering _at the same time._
> 
> Imagine it as a play with stage directions:
> 
> Actor One: [sounding very angry] *Well, where is it?! Where did you leave it?!*
> 
> Actor Two: [he is pacing the room, scratching his head and looking worried]*I have forgotten...*[there is a long pause, during which he appears to be thinking very deeply. Suddenly, he leaps into the air]*NOW I remember!*
> 
> Does this make it any clearer?


 
Well, a comma pause is normal for something being a stative verb ( forget).

I have forgotten sth, ( you forgot it but still related with the present, why because that's the usage of the present perfect to connect the past with the present. Some one had me remembered it ( this action from the past causes to recall that thing into the present Now I recall it. ( present now) .
*The past perfect* has no room here because the activity is within the past not the present. These characteristics are in all my books.
The fact that the forgetting is connected with the present from the past does not mean it is a remembering and forgetting at the same time. *the forgetting was there until someone had me recalled it now*. This now is the result of an action from the past into the now moment= I recall it now present.
*I don't see what's the problem* using the present perfect for an activity past but connected with the present. Besides being the only tense connected withe present(*now*)

Ivy29


----------



## .   1

Ivy29 said:


> *I don't see what's the problem* using the present perfect for an activity past but connected with the present. Besides being the only tense connected withe present(*now*)
> 
> Ivy29


The problem is that it is just not done that way in English and you can make every logical argument until you are blue in the face but this will not change the glaring fact that you are just plain wrong and oddly stubborn in arguing your case.
There is not one native English speaker who would hear you use 'I have forgotten something but you reminded me of it' and not think that you were not a non native speaker.

.,,


----------



## fenixpollo

Ivy, you have a very good understanding of the grammar rules  in this case.  Please understand, however, that you are using the rules to create a sentence that is illogical.





Ivy29 said:


> *I have forgotten sth*, ( you forgot it but still related with the present, why because that's the usage of the present perfect to connect the past with the present. Some one had me remembered it ( this action from the past causes to recall that thing into the present *Now I recall it.* ( present now) .


 In the reality in which *I* live, your statement is impossible. Please forget the grammar for a moment and tell me -- ¿es posible acordarte de algo, pero en el mismo momento del tiempo olvidarlo?


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> The problem is that it is just not done that way in English and you can make every logical argument until you are blue in the face but this will not change the glaring fact that you are just plain wrong and oddly stubborn in arguing your case.
> There is not one native English speaker who would hear you use 'I have forgotten something but you reminded me of it' and not think that you were not a non native speaker.
> 
> .,,


 
You had forgotten is plain past and no connected with the present, but the present perfect yes.
I had lived in London ( is past)
I have lived in London( must probably you are there)
I had been married ( probably you are divorced or widower)
I have been married ( for 10 years, must probably you still married)

I had forgotten sth and I was able to remember it since David had me remember it yesterday ( completely PAST).

I have forgotten sth, but I am able to remember now ( timing of utterance) it because David had me remember it this week
I couldn't believe that in English you have to stuck into the past to utter sth that affects the present or the now. My logical question would be why then the PRESENT PERFECT???
the past perfect CANNOT connect with the present by its very same definition that are in my books. Maybe my books are stubborn not me.
FORGETTING STH is there with present, past , past perfect present perfect, etc. The connection with present should be in present perfect, the timing in grammar is different from physical timing. I can use the historical present to resuscitate the past. we have present perfect in Spanish too. 
*He olvidado algo, pero mi amigo me hizo recordar que tengo que ir ahora ( now) a ver Mr Gates. Es purísimo castellano. I have forgotten sth but my friend David had me remember I have to visit Mr. gates. If you were to put that sentence from Spanish into English past perfect the sense would be wholly different.*
*That sentence above can be stated keeping the timing in more patterns in Spanish.*
*My books are stubborn and I do understand them.*
*As a tip the RAE,  the present perfect in Spanish is called also as ' Perfect preterit compound'*

*Ivy29*


----------



## emma42

Ivy, why don't you post this problem in the English Only Forum?  Then you will see the opinions of many more native English speakers.  Perhaps this will persuade you that your grammar book is either wrong, or that it cannot deal with every exception.


----------



## Rayines

Creo que no es comparable en este caso el inglés con el castellano. Me inclino a pensar que en español las posibilidades son mayores en el uso del tiempo de verbo en el ejemplo mencionado.


----------



## Ivy29

fenixpollo said:


> Ivy, you have a very good understanding of the grammar rules in this case. Please understand, however, that you are using the rules to create a sentence that is illogical. In the reality in which *I* live, your statement is impossible. Please forget the grammar for a moment and tell me -- ¿es posible acordarte de algo, pero en el mismo momento del tiempo olvidarlo?


 
Fenixpollo hay que distinguir entre tiempo físico y tiempo gramatical. No son iguales. El antepresente de Bello es el único que conecta el pasado con el presente.

*He olvidado algo, pero Fenixpollo me lo recordó, ahora lo recuerdo tengo que ir a la oficina de impuestos* ( ambiente, trabajamos en la misma oficina).
Fenoxipollo es mi hermano, *He olvidado algo Fenix, pero él me hizo recordar que yo tengo que ir a visitar a Shakira* ( Qué burro olvidarme de ir a HIPS not lie).LOL

NO VEO lo ilógico del presente perfecto en castellano. ¿Me puedes explicar por qué es ilógico, amigo??

Ivy29


----------



## Iliana

Ivy29 said:


> Fenixpollo hay que distinguir entre tiempo físico y tiempo gramatical. No son iguales. El antepresente de Bello es el único que conecta el pasado con el presente.
> 
> *He olvidado algo, pero Fenixpollo me lo recordó, ahora lo recuerdo tengo que ir a la oficina de impuestos* ( ambiente, trabajamos en la misma oficina).
> Fenoxipollo es mi hermano, *He olvidado algo Fenix, pero él me hizo recordar que yo tengo que ir a visitar a Shakira* ( Qué burro olvidarme de ir a HIPS not lie).LOL
> 
> NO VEO lo ilógico del presente perfecto en castellano. ¿Me puedes explicar por qué es ilógico, amigo??
> 
> Ivy29


 Creo que el se refería a que la oración no es lógica en inglés. La oración en castellano es lógica y suena hermosa.


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, why don't you post this problem in the English Only Forum? Then you will see the opinions of many more native English speakers. Perhaps this will persuade you that your grammar book is either wrong, or that it cannot deal with every exception.


 
Good suggestion but some of the forists keep asking me questions.
My problem, Emma is that we have in both languages the SAME TENSE : Present perfect. For me : he olvidado and my books is correct.
if you state I had forgotten sth you should place the activity or event into the past ( no choice) before other PAST event. NO choice except for the conditionals type 2 ( present and future).
It does not fit in my head that English having a tense to connect past actions to the present in this particualr sentence have to be just past perfect which cannot connect with the present and against all my British authors, American author AZAR's, etc. mind you the Spanish grammars.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

Iliana said:


> Creo que el se refería a que la oración no es lógica en inglés. La oración en castellano es lógica y suena hermosa.


 
Gracias, Ileana por lo de HERMOSA. Fue que Fenixpollo me dijo que la oración era ilógica para él en castellano.

Tú que opinas? I have forgotten something ( present perfect) but Ileana had me remeber that I have to go the income bureau. (this was what I have forgotten)

Ivy29


----------



## fenixpollo

Iliana said:


> Ivy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He olvidado algo, pero Fenixpollo me lo recordó, ahora lo recuerdo tengo que ir a la oficina de impuestos.
> 
> 
> 
> Creo que el se refería a que la oración no es lógica en inglés. La oración en castellano es lógica y suena hermosa.
Click to expand...

Ya encontramos el problema clave: para mí, la frase arriba de Ivy es completamente imposible, illógico e irreal. No es posible, en la realidad en la que vivo yo, olvidarse de algo y acordarse de algo en el mismo momento. Puede ser que en castellano, esta construcción sea normal y no crea ninguna disonancia en la mente de la persona que habla; pero por favor entiende el hecho que en la mente de un angloparlante, esta construcción no tiene ningún sentido.

Ivy, tienes toda la razón de que el presente perfecto/antepresente es el tiempo gramatical que conecta el pasado con el presente; pero en este ejemplo específico, el uso de have forgotten/he olvidado crea una paradoja que, en mi cerebro, no se podría resolver en ningún idioma -- a pesar de la evidencia experta que traigas de tus libros. 

_We have found the key problem: for me, the above sentence of Ivy's is completely impossible, illogical and unreal. It is not possible, in the reality in which I live, to forget something and remember something in the same moment. Maybe in Spanish, this construction is normal and does not create any dissonance in the mind of the speaker; but please accept the fact that in the mind of an English-speaker, this construction does not make any sense._


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> The problem is that it is just not done that way in English and you can make every logical argument until you are blue in the face but this will not change the glaring fact that you are just plain wrong and oddly stubborn in arguing your case.
> There is not one native English speaker who would hear you use 'I have forgotten something but you reminded me of it' and not think that you were not a non native speaker.
> 
> .,,


 

I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or un usual ??

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

fenixpollo said:


> Ya encontramos el problema clave: para mí, la frase arriba de Ivy es completamente imposible, illógico e irreal. No es posible, en la realidad en la que vivo yo, olvidarse de algo y acordarse de algo en el mismo momento. _._


 
Se estan equivocando, la oración no se trata de olvidarse y acordarse al mismo tiempo. Sino que se trata de recordar esa cuestión en el momento que alguien la menciona. 
Por lo tanto alguien tiene la cuestión olvidada la recuerda en el momento en que la otra persona se la recuerda, en ese momento ese tema deja de estar olvidado para ser recordado justo en ese instante, por lo tanto no son las 2 cosas al mismo tiempo.


----------



## fenixpollo

mariente said:


> Se estan equivocando, la oración no se trata de olvidarse y acordarse al mismo tiempo. Sino que se trata de recordar esa cuestión en el momento que alguien la menciona.
> Por lo tanto alguien tiene la cuestión olvidada la recuerda en el momento en que la otra persona se la recuerda, en ese momento ese tema deja de estar olvidado para ser recordado justo en ese instante, por lo tanto no son las 2 cosas al mismo tiempo.


Sí, precisamente de eso se trata, porque, si seguimos las reglas de Ivy, "have forgotten" se refiere al presente. Si el tema deja de ser olvidado, entonces el olvido queda en el pasado, y no se puede usar el presente (have) con ese tema ya acordado.





Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife *had* me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or un usual ??


Si tu esposa *te acordó* en el pasado, entonces, *habías* olvidado en el pasado -- no *has* olvidado en el (ante)presente.


----------



## mariente

fenixpollo said:


> Sí, precisamente de eso se trata, porque, si seguimos las reglas de Ivy, "have forgotten" se refiere al presente. Si el tema deja de ser olvidado, entonces el olvido queda en el pasado, y no se puede usar el presente (have) con ese tema ya acordado.Si tu esposa *te acordó* en el pasado, entonces, *habías* olvidado en el pasado -- no *has* olvidado en el (ante)presente.


Exactamente. La acción de olvidar queda en el pasado en el momento en que recordás la acción.


----------



## Ivy29

fenixpollo said:


> Ya encontramos el problema clave: para mí, la frase arriba de Ivy es completamente imposible, illógico e irreal. No es posible, en la realidad en la que vivo yo, olvidarse de algo y acordarse de algo en el mismo momento. Puede ser que en castellano, esta construcción sea normal y no crea ninguna disonancia en la mente de la persona que habla; pero por favor entiende el hecho que en la mente de un angloparlante, esta construcción no tiene ningún sentido.
> 
> *Sorry, Fenixpollo, you are confusing a stative verb ( forget) this verb and its similars obey the principle to be or not to be. *
> *If you want to give the idea that something comes and goes almost simultaneously you should use the present in both languages*
> *Me acuerdo y me olvido de esto cada dos segundos...*
> *Tengos lapsus de olvido y de recordar eso...*
> PRESENT perfect :
> I have forgotten  sth ( I cannot remember now ) but someone had me remember it. ( now I recall it because someone reminded me).
> I have been to Italy many times( Present perfect for repeated actions)
> 
> 
> Ivy, tienes toda la razón de que el presente perfecto/antepresente es el tiempo gramatical que conecta el pasado con el presente; pero en este ejemplo específico, el uso de have forgotten/he olvidado crea una paradoja que, en mi cerebro, no se podría resolver en ningún idioma -- a pesar de la evidencia experta que traigas de tus libros.
> 
> *No entiendo la paradoja que te crea* ???? es decir que si me olvido de las llaves siempre quedan en el olvido esto sólo sucede en el pasado simple, pasado perfecto.- Como dirías en Inglés = He olvidado algo. Alguien me hizo recordarlo ( ahora), now ( queriendo significar que si alguien me lo hace recordar ya no queda en el olvido ( presente). El pasado es pasado pero aquí se conecta con el presente, pue alguien me hace recordar lo que *estaba olvidado* (  ahora ya  me recuerdo ( ESTA ES LA CLAVE del presente prefecto). En el pasado me olvidé, pero por causa de alguien que me recordó en este momento (now) ya me recuerdo ( present pefect).
> _We have found the key problem: for me, the above sentence of Ivy's is completely impossible, illogical and unreal. It is not possible, in the reality in which I live, to forget something and remember something in the same moment. Maybe in Spanish, this construction is normal and does not create any dissonance in the mind of the speaker; but please accept the fact that in the mind of an English-speaker, this construction does not make any sense._


The grammatical timing is different from your perception, it is a sequence
PAST---------------x Olvidado-------0 present-----------Future
It was forgotten in the past but not now ( present) why ? because someone had me remember it, so at the present is not anymore forgotten.
If you look the timing line of AZAR's you will see the sequence.
This example should not condemned for ever to the OBLIVION, but with the simple past yes, the past perfect much more because it is a PAST of a PAST.
The ONLY way I can  resuscitate sth is to use the historical present.
ONE THING can be something in the past but also can change and be sth different into the present. The only tenses you couldn't do that are the  SIMPLE PAST and PAST PERFECT. ( because it started and finsihed)
Last night Fenixpollo was unhappy but today SHAKIRA PEP HIM UP. It is a very pleasant CHANGE.LOL. Would it be very sad for you fenixpollo to remain UNHAPPY all the time despite my girl Shakira.
Or fenixpollo was unhappy for a short moment but then SHAKIRA pep him up with hips don't lie, now he is super happy!!!!. What was in the past is past but a new situation came up and changed its mood.NOW HE IS HAPPY.
The PRESENT PERFECT is not a perfective tense. Because it keeps the umbilical chord attached to the present.
Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Repito: la acción de olvido queda en el pasado y no tiene ninguna consecuencia en el presente puesto que se ha cortado.
Es lo mismo que en español, si lo entendés en español vas a poder entenderlo en inglés


----------



## .   1

Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or un usual ??
> 
> Ivy29


This sentence marks you as a relatively inexperienced user of English.
I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or unusual ??

I forgot where I left my car-keys but my wife told me that I left them in the bathroom so I went and picked them up then drove to my office. Is that impossible, wrong or unusual??

.,,


----------



## .   1

Ivy29 said:


> You had forgotten is plain past and no connected with the present, but the present perfect yes.
> I had lived in London ( is past)
> I have lived in London( must probably you are there)
> I had been married ( probably you are divorced or widower)
> I have been married ( for 10 years, must probably you still married)


You had forgotten is plain past and no not connected with the present but the present perfect yes is.

I had lived in London (no space between (and word is past)
I had lived in London (is past)

I have lived in London(space must probably you are there)
I have lived in London (most probably you are there)

I had been married (space probably you are divorced or widower)
I had been married (probably you are divorced or widowed)

I have been married (space for 10 years, must probably you still married)
I have been married (for 10 years, most certainly I am still married)


----------



## mariente

Y si pasa esto por ejemplo

a: está enojada todavía?
are you still angry?
b: no i m not, by the way, i had never got angry--> no lo estoy, nunca lo estuve. Ahora, si yo quisiese decir:  no me había enojado. 
Esta bien? se puede decir así como lo dije?o se dice de otra forma?
y otra cosa: esta bien el uso del past perfect aca también?
Gracias!
¿Alguien me ayuda con esta por favor?


----------



## mazbook

Hola Ivy:





Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or un usual ??
> 
> Ivy29


You are correct.  It is IMPOSSIBLE and WRONG.  Since it's impossible, it is not unusual, as it would NEVER be used.

As I've said many times, "No soy gramático, soy editor."  I can't tell you the rules, BUT with 50 years of experience in writing and editing the English language I CAN tell you when you are WRONG — ALWAYS!

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> You had forgotten is plain past and no not connected with the present but the present perfect yes is.
> 
> I had lived in London (no space between (and word is past)
> I had lived in London (is past)
> 
> I have lived in London(space must probably you are there)
> I have lived in London (most probably you are there)
> 
> I had been married (space probably you are divorced or widower)
> I had been married (probably you are divorced or widowed)
> 
> I have been married (space for 10 years, must probably you still married)
> I have been married (for 10 years, most certainly I am still married)


 
Thanks for the corrections, but the issue at hand is  more important for me. Do you agree with my perception of the past perfect and present perfect ?? if not how you will phrase the following Spanish sentence: 

*He olvidado algo y David me lo hizo recordar, y ahora ya sé lo que debo hacer.*

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Iliana said:


> Creo que el se refería a que la oración no es lógica en inglés. La oración en castellano es lógica y suena hermosa.


 


Ivy29 said:


> *He olvidado algo y David me lo hizo recordar, y ahora ya sé lo que debo hacer.*
> 
> Ivy29


 
Esta frase no es ni _correcta ni hermosa_ _ni lógica_ en castellano. No sé en colombiano, pero en castellano no lo es.

Había olvidado algo, David me lo recordó....


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> Esta frase no es ni _correcta ni hermosa_ _ni lógica_ en castellano. No sé en colombiano, pero en castellano no lo es.
> 
> Había olvidado algo, David me lo recordó....


 
*En castellano es bien CORRECTA,* pero si tienes dudas escríbelas y las analizamos para que la verdad BRILLE y no levante más ampollas.
A propósito gracias por corregirme las *TILDES* y las *mayúsculas*.

Felicidades
Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> A propósito gracias por corregirme las *TILDES* y las *mayúsculas*.
> 
> Felicidades
> Ivy29


 
De nada.


----------



## Ivy29

mazbook said:


> Hola Ivy:You are correct. It is IMPOSSIBLE and WRONG. Since it's impossible, it is not unusual, as it would NEVER be used.
> 
> As I've said many times, "No soy gramático, soy editor." I can't tell you the rules, BUT with 50 years of experience in writing and editing the English language I CAN tell you when you are WRONG — ALWAYS!
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán


 

como dirías en Inglés :
*He olvidado algo y mi amigo David me lo hizo recordar y ahora sé lo que debo hacer.*

Ivy29


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office. That is IMPOSSIBLE, WRONG or un usual ??



If it were an English sentence, I might be able to respond to the question.  It's difficult to tell where the problems begin and where they end, as this is a jumble of logical confusion, temporal confloption, and grammatical error.

It begins with the present prefect, then superimposes a past tense on top of the present, switches to the present indicative, omits needed punctuation....  It is a sorrowful attempt at English.  Perhaps some obscure or even well known grammar book could offer theoretical justification, if one were to choose to misinterpret the rules to attempt to make them fit the erroneous sentence.  That wouldn't make it come close to correct English.


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Exactamente. La acción de olvidar queda en el pasado en el momento en que recordás la acción.


 
Eso es exactmente!! por fin alguien entendió mi percepción de la oración. Gracias, Mariente.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> If it were an English sentence, I might be able to respond to the question. It's difficult to tell where the problems begin and where they end, as this is a jumble of logical confusion, temporal confloption, and grammatical error.
> 
> It begins with the present prefect, then superimposes a past tense on top of the present, switches to the present indicative, omits needed punctuation.... It is a sorrowful attempt at English. Perhaps some obscure or even well known grammar book could offer theoretical justification, if one were to choose to misinterpret the rules to attempt to make them fit the erroneous sentence. That wouldn't make it come close to correct English.


*The sequence is clear.*
I* have forgotten sth, ( presente perfect) the forgetting is past, but someone had me remember it , now I do recall it, then I know what to do. The only tense that connects THE PAST with the present is Present perfect*

*Past..............x I have forgotten sth ...0 present........... future.*

<<< *now I do recall it>>>> present. because someone had me remember it.*
*There is NO SPECIFIc mention of time.*
Ivy29


----------



## cuchuflete

My comments are in black text, to avoid any confusion with the more blatant text to which I respond. 





Ivy29 said:


> *The sequence is clear.  *It may be clear in your head, but it would confuse the living daylights out of any native speaker of English.
> I* have forgotten sth, ( presente perfect) the forgetting is past, but someone had me remember it , now I do recall it, then I know what to do. The only tense that connects THE PAST with the present is Present perfect*
> 
> *Past..............x I have forgotten sth ...0 present........... future.*
> 
> <<< *now I do recall it>>>> present. because someone had me remember it.*
> *There is NO SPECIFIc mention of time.  *If you wish to go to your grave fully convinced that time in grammatical tense is totally unrelated to logical time, I won't waste time attempting to dissuade you.



The sentence we are discussing is total rubbish.  I would like to be able to find something, anything, nice to say about it, but it's just a heap of mistakes all mixed together.   If it is yet another attempt to beat the dead horse of using the present perfect and simple past in the same sentence, you have already persuaded yourself that this is the right thing to do.  You have not persuaded any native English speakers.  

The logical conclusion is that your _interpretation_ of what you have found in your grammar texts is superior to the logic, knowledge, experience, and educated intuition of all the native speakers. Of course that is a possibility, if not a likelihood.  A diligent and perceptive reader will examine all of the evidence, and draw a conclusion.


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> If it were an English sentence, I might be able to respond to the question. It's difficult to tell where the problems begin and where they end, as this is a jumble of logical confusion, temporal confloption, and grammatical error.
> 
> It begins with the present prefect, then superimposes a past tense on top of the present, switches to the present indicative, omits needed punctuation.... It is a sorrowful attempt at English. Perhaps some obscure or even well known grammar book could offer theoretical justification, if one were to choose to misinterpret the rules to attempt to make them fit the erroneous sentence. That wouldn't make it come close to correct English.


 
*Confloption* is it a new word or maybe you meant *CONFLATION*.
How would you rephrase it  in your native language the idea in my sentence that you have forgotten sth then someone had you remember it, then *now* you remember it and know what to do.

Ivy29


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:


> *Confloption* is it a new word or maybe you meant *CONFLATION*.
> How would rephrase in your native language the idea in my sentence that you have forgotten sth then someone had you remember it, then   *now* you remember it and know what to do.
> 
> Ivy29





> *Confloption* - a confused state, possibly involving a flop for extra points. A mess up. As in "You made a bit of a confloption of that" when you get tangled up in your smb line while deploying it. Or "What a confloption"! - exclamation - when 6 divers all attempt to get through a silty hatchway at the same time.


source
I most certainly did not mean conflation, which is just a combination.  It lacks the needed sense of confusion and disarray.  Perhaps I should have said, "a painfully dysfunctional juxtaposition". 


"...someone had you remember it" is not idiomatic English, but I understand the intent.  


I will be happy to rephrase your sentence if you are interested in learning how it would be written or spoken by a native speaker.  If your sole interest is in restating, yet again, your interpretation of what you have read in your grammar books, then it would be a waste of both my time and your own.


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> My comments are in black text, to avoid any confusion with the more blatant text to which I respond.
> 
> The sentence we are discussing is total rubbish. I would like to be able to find something, anything, nice to say about it, but it's just a heap of mistakes all mixed together. If it is yet another attempt to beat the dead horse of using the present perfect and simple past in the same sentence, you have already persuaded yourself that this is the right thing to do. You have not persuaded any native English speakers.
> 
> The logical conclusion is that your _interpretation_ of what you have found in your grammar texts is superior to the logic, knowledge, experience, and educated intuition of all the native speakers. Of course that is a possibility, if not a likelihood. A diligent and perceptive reader will examine all of the evidence, and draw a conclusion.


 
*How would you rephrase the rubbish in your good and sound logics keeping the idea : you have forgotten sth, someone had you remember it then you know what to do.*
*when you sit in your car, you look for the keys, you cannot find them, you have forgotten where you left them, but your dear wife had you remember it (because she saw them a moment ago) in the bathroom then you go to the bathroom pick the keys up and drive to your work. *

*Ivy29*


----------



## emma42

Ivy, you have already have examples of this.  Here is another one:
*
I had forgotten how to switch on the washing machine, but now I remember because Fenix reminded me.*


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:


> * keeping the idea : you have forgotten sth, someone had you remember it then you know what to do.*



For a start, to express the idea above in English, you have two broad choices:
1. Write two or more distinct sentences;
2. Use the past perfect and the present indicative in the same sentence.

Either approach is acceptable.




> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office.


Approach #1—

[Context and action are in the present.]
I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home*.
**T*hen my wife had has me remember it*.  * 
*S*he says I left them in the bathroom*. * *T*hen I go there, pick them up and drive to my office.

or--

[Context and action are in the past.]
I had forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home.
*T*hen my wife had me remember it. 
*S*he said I left them in the bathroom*. * *T*hen I went there, picked them up and drove to my office.


Approach #2— Restated in standard English:

I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office.

I have forgotten where I put my car keys at home, when my wife reminds me, saying that I left them in the bathroom.  I go to the bathroom, pick them up, and drive to my office. 

alternative phrasing:

I have forgotten where I put my car keys and then my wife reminds me. She says that I have left them in the bathroom.....

If you are describing a situation in which you had forgotten something, and had been reminded of it...


I had forgotten where I put [or where I had put] my car keys and then my wife reminded me, saying that I had left them....



You could try to cram all of those disparate ideas into a single sentence.  It is grammatically possible.  It would be a stylistic mess, and should not be done other than as an example of recorded speech.


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:


> *when you sit in your car, you look for the keys, you cannot find them, you have forgotten where you left them, but your dear wife had you remember it (because she saw them a moment ago) in the bathroom then you go to the bathroom pick the keys up and drive to your work. *



This is an example of the confusion that you insist on.

When you sit [present tense] in your car, you look [present tense] for the keys, you cannot [present tense] find them.
You have forgotten [present perfect...totally correct and acceptable here.] where you left them. But, your dear wife had
[Wrong! you have abruptly switched from narrating in the present, when you are sitting in your car, to a past action.]

There is a simple solution.  If you are narrating a scene in which something took place over an extended time frame, and was altered by a specific action, then use the past perfect and the present indicative.


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> For a start, to express the idea above in English, you have two broad choices:
> 1. Write two or more distinct sentences;
> 2. Use the past perfect and the present indicative in the same sentence.
> 
> Either approach is acceptable.
> 
> 
> Approach #1—
> 
> [Context and action are in the present.]
> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home*.*
> *T*hen my wife had has me remember it*. *
> *S*he says I left them in the bathroom*. **T*hen I go there, pick them up and drive to my office.
> 
> or--
> 
> [Context and action are in the past.]
> I had forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home.
> *T*hen my wife had me remember it.
> *S*he said I left them in the bathroom*. **T*hen I went there, picked them up and drove to my office.
> 
> 
> Approach #2— Restated in standard English:
> 
> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office.
> 
> I have forgotten where I put my car keys at home, when my wife reminds me, saying that I left them in the bathroom. I go to the bathroom, pick them up, and drive to my office.
> 
> alternative phrasing:
> 
> I have forgotten where I put my car keys and then my wife reminds me. She says that I have left them in the bathroom.....
> 
> If you are describing a situation in which you had forgotten something, and had been reminded of it...
> 
> 
> I had forgotten where I put [or where I had put] my car keys and then my wife reminded me, saying that I had left them....
> 
> 
> 
> You could try to cram all of those disparate ideas into a single sentence. It is grammatically possible. It would be a stylistic mess, and should not be done other than as an example of recorded speech.


 
*Thank you, that is exactly what I want.* . The point I was sure about :
1-You can use the present perfect for sth happening into the past but connected to the present. ( using the present timing) I have forgotten the key ( something) *the timing is past but connected with the now ( present) my wife has you remember it ( present) then she says ( present) I left ( PAST) them in the bathroom ( recent past)*
2- Someone can remind me about something and then you can do whatever you were suppoosed to.

The present perfect can be used for PRESENT context and the PAST PERFECT context for the past.
That was my standing with a very messy construction. I agree with you.
Thanks again. 

*He olvidado donde puse las llaves del carro, mi mujer me ha dicho que están en el baño pues las había dejado allí o las dejé allí*. *A last question* can I put what my wife says in present perfect also = my wife says I have left them in the bathroom ??
Thank you.

Happy night.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> For a start, to express the idea above in English, you have two broad choices:
> 1. Write two or more distinct sentences;
> 2. Use the past perfect and the present indicative in the same sentence.
> 
> Either approach is acceptable.
> 
> 
> Approach #1—
> 
> [Context and action are in the present.]
> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home*.*
> *T*hen my wife had has me remember it*. *
> *S*he says I left them in the bathroom*. **T*hen I go there, pick them up and drive to my office.
> 
> or--
> 
> [Context and action are in the past.]
> I had forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home.
> *T*hen my wife had me remember it.
> *S*he said I left them in the bathroom*. **T*hen I went there, picked them up and drove to my office.
> 
> 
> Approach #2— Restated in standard English:
> 
> I have forgotten where I put the keys of my car at home, then my wife had me remember it, she says I left them in the bathroom, then I go there pick them up and drive to my office.
> 
> I have forgotten where I put my car keys at home, when my wife reminds me, saying that I left them in the bathroom. I go to the bathroom, pick them up, and drive to my office.
> 
> alternative phrasing:
> 
> I have forgotten where I put my car keys and then my wife reminds me. She says that I have left them in the bathroom.....
> 
> If you are describing a situation in which you had forgotten something, and had been reminded of it...
> 
> 
> I had forgotten where I put [or where I had put] my car keys and then my wife reminded me, saying that I had left them....
> 
> 
> 
> You could try to cram all of those disparate ideas into a single sentence. It is grammatically possible. It would be a stylistic mess, and should not be done other than as an example of recorded speech.


 
*Excellent answer and to the point I was looking for*. Thanks a lot . The different sentences construction were enlightening and crystal clear how you can use the present perfect and the past perfect, I am going to keep this post in my documents for further consultation

Happy night and thanks again.

Ivy29


----------



## emma42

Ivy, I am so glad you have found the answer you were looking for, but the fact remains that you were incorrect when you stated that, "I have forgotten, but now I remember".  Do you now accept that this is incorrect?  I need to know that my attempts and those of other forer@s to explain have not been in vain!


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, I am so glad you have found the answer you were looking for, but the fact remains that you were incorrect when you stated that, "I have forgotten, but now I remember". Do you now accept that this is incorrect? I need to know that my attempts and those of other forer@s to explain have not been in vain!


 
Thanks for your trying to explain it. Cuchuflete did a magisterial explanation.
I have forgotten= is correct, maybe the order and the timing of the person who remind me or have reminded me were at fault. But certainly you can use the present perfect = past connected with the present.

Happy night

Ivy29


----------



## heidita

Ivy29 said:


> Thanks for your trying to explain it. Cuchuflete did a magisterial explanation.
> I have forgotten= is correct, maybe the order and the timing of the person who remind me or have reminded me were at fault. But certainly you can use the present perfect = past connected with the present.
> 
> Happy night
> 
> Ivy29


 
I am sorry emma, but there is no hope at all! 

I am sorry for you Ivy, if you couldn't even understand cuchuflete's explanation. 

You should have one thing clear. 

The sentence 

*I have forgotten where I put my key but now I remember.*

is just as incorrect as the Spanish sentence:

He olvidado dónde he puesto las llaves pero ahora me acuerdo.

*In both cases you need the Past Perfect.*

Have you finally understood that? Possibly I am mistaken and you finally agree with this.

Present perfect is not correct in this case.

Or do you actually agree to that?

*



How would you rephrase the rubbish in your good and sound logics keeping the idea : you have forgotten sth, someone had you remember it then you know what to do.

Click to expand...

 
Would you be so kind as to explain the underlined part? (the underlining is mine)*


----------



## heidita

emma42 said:


> Ivy, I am so glad you have found the answer you were looking for, but the fact remains that you were incorrect when you stated that, "I have forgotten, but now I remember". Do you now accept that this is incorrect? I need to know that my attempts and those of other forer@s to explain have not been in vain!


 


Ivy29 said:


> I have forgotten= is correct, maybe the order and the timing of the person who remind me or have reminded me were at fault. But certainly you can use the present perfect = past connected with the present.
> 
> Happy night
> 
> Ivy29


 
I'm afraid Ivy is not able (willing?) to understand.


----------



## Ivy29

heidita said:


> I am sorry emma, but there is no hope at all!
> 
> I am sorry for you Ivy, if you couldn't even understand cuchuflete's explanation.
> 
> You should have one thing clear.
> 
> The sentence
> 
> *I have forgotten where I put my key but now I remember.*
> 
> is just as incorrect as the Spanish sentence:
> 
> He olvidado dónde he puesto las llaves pero ahora me acuerdo.
> 
> *In both cases you need the Past Perfect.*
> 
> Have you finally understood that? Possibly I am mistaken and you finally agree with this.
> 
> Present perfect is not correct in this case.
> 
> Or do you actually agree to that?
> 
> 
> 
> *Would you be so kind as to explain the underlined part? (the underlining is mine)*


 
I would rather exchange knowledge with cuchuflete. he did a wonderful job. You should read first what I have posted, *not mutilating* the sentences trying to prove whatever.

Feliz día


----------



## emma42

Ivy, cuchuflete does not agree with you.

I think you are taking the piss.


----------



## Ivy29

emma42 said:


> Ivy, cuchuflete does not agree with you.
> 
> I think you are taking the piss.


 
It doesn't matter. He did a magisterial work explaining the two variants :
I have forgotten ( presente perfect) past connected with the now. Someone HAS me remember ( Excellent clarification of Cuchuflete).

Past .
I had forgotten ( past) not connected with the present ( had me remember here is the key of both constructions.

*To be right or wrong is not important what is real essential is the TRUTH.* And Cuchuflete has come up with it . His parsing is a masterpiece of clarity, accuracy and professional management of his native language.
The reasoning and confrontation in all these issues should be in the  high levels of the *intellect*, he did it perfectly, and clarified me nuances in thoses sentences I haven't had known otherwise. Thanks Cuchuflete again 

Cheers
Ivy29


----------



## HyphenSpider

> Someone HAS me remember


 
Is this right??


----------



## cuchuflete

Heidita said:
			
		

> *Would you be so kind as to explain the underlined part? (the underlining is mine)* 		 	 		 		 		 		 			 				__________________


 It is a reference to post #199, in which I made an unkind remark about the sentence we have been working with in the most recent threads.  

HyphenSpider-  See post #204.  It is not correct.  It is an attempt at a literal, but unidiomatic, translation of se me hizo recordar.  In English the construction is 'she reminded me'.

In very formal, even stilted, English, one may say, "she caused me to remember", but this would normally require that the entire sentence be written in a similar register.
'She has me remember' and 'she makes me remember' may be grammatically correct, but sound odd.  To be clear, these are points of style and idiomatic construction, and not of grammar.


----------



## heidita

emma42 said:


> Ivy, cuchuflete does not agree with you.
> 
> I think you are taking the piss.


 
Emma, the expression sounds really funny.

Is it this meaning?



> To rile, mock, or be a jerk to another person whether or not the person is joking or being serious.


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:
			
		

> I have forgotten= is correct, maybe the order and the timing of the person who remind me or have reminded me were at fault. But certainly you can use the present perfect = past connected with the present.


This is exactly correct.  There is, and has been, no dispute about your use of the present perfect.  (Lo entendemos de la misma manera.)  The controversy has been about the intermixing of the present perfect with the simple past.  

The specific point of contention has been about whether it is correct—in English—to begin with the present perfect and then add a statement in the simple past, and then return to the present indicative.  It is not, in the sample sentence provided.  I cannot think of a case in which this would be acceptable, but given the propensity of English to bend rules, I will not be absolutist and declare that such a thing could never occur.  Recorded speech, which captures the extreme liberties native speakers take with grammar rules, might offer 
an example.  However, that would be contrary to what grammar books teach us!  

Here is a summary of the generalities about which we seem to have reached agreement.  (Creo que sirve igual en castellano, pero esto lo dejo para los peritos...)

(1)Describing a situation which began at a past time, specific or undetermined; (2)a specific action occurs; (3) additional actions occur in the most current part of the time frame referenced in (1):

Use the present perfect for (1), the present indicative for both (2) and for (3), OR use the past perfect for (1), the simple past for both (2) and for (3). 

 Do not use the present perfect for (1), followed by the simple past for (2) and the present indicative for (3).  

I have been looking out the window at the river and I see a flock of geese marching across the road, so I go to find something to feed them.  

I had been looking out the window at the river and saw a flock of geese marching across the road, so I went to find something to feed them. 

I have been looking out the window at the river and sawcross a flock of geese.....


Y con éso, estimados y desocupados lectores, os pido permiso para ausentarme a buscar comida para estos malditos gansos, que dejan sus cagadas enormes por todas partes y hacen ruídos diabólicos. He estado pensando en matarlos cuando mi perro me hace recordar que son graciosos, al menos desde la perspectiva de otro ganso, así que vuelvo a la búsqueda de comida para ellos.


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> Eso es exactmente!! por fin alguien entendió mi percepción de la oración. Gracias, Mariente.
> 
> Ivy29


Pero por eso va past perfect


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Pero por eso va past perfect


 

*El presente perfecto tiene en sus entrañas el pasado* pero con un cordón umbilical hacia el presente. la relación de los tiempos debe guardar un punto de referencia con el presente. ¿Cuál? *He olvidado algo* (= acción pasada) alguien un amigo me hace recordar ese algo del pasado y se ancla en el presente (now), y ahora ( now)  puedo hacer algo como buscar las llaves del carro y conducir al trabajo en tiempo presente.
*La clave es que el recordar debe* ser en presente para poder justificar la relación hacia el ahora y poder usar el presente perfecto que es el único tiempo PASADo que se relaciona con presente. Si se pone este *recordar* en PASADO entonces la estructura debe referirse al *pasado* como cuchuflete bien lo explicó.

When some caused me to do sth the verb is toMAKE.

the pattern is 
ACTIVE= make somebody do sth .( bare infinitive).
Passive = be made to do.
Here I think we should change the clause = someone Make me remember, or someone made me recall or I am made to recall.

Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

cuchuflete said:


> This is exactly correct. There is, and has been, no dispute about your use of the present perfect. (Lo entendemos de la misma manera.) The controversy has been about the intermixing of the present perfect with the simple past.
> 
> 
> Ivy29 : Here I have a question *since the present perfect moves between the past and present*. He olvidado algo, no puedo recordar, pero mi esposa *me hizo* caer en cuenta de que *tengo que *ir a la oficina de impuestos. *In Spanish, I have forgotten something, I cannot recall it, but my wife made me recall that I have to go to the income office. THE FORGETTING in the present perfect is past. Why cannot we use the past of make. since once I have remembered it is not past but present??? ( undetermined past=Present pefect). This remembering has a result into the present (now).*
> 
> Also, I think, we should change the prvious one for this clause *has me remember*, meaning that someone else is doing something for me. Since my wife /make/made me remember ( active) I'm/was made *to* remember (passive).
> Thanks
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Y dale con he olvidado algo. El he olvidado algo no está en cuestión. He olvidado es I have forgotten e implica que AUN NO RECORDÁS LA CUESTIÓN.
En español está mal decir: he olvidado algo pero ahora lo recuerdo, porque tal me hizo acordar. No tiene sentido, porque en español he olvidado algo implica que todavía no recordas y no se puede olvidar y recordar al mismo tiempo. Por lo tanto es "lo habia olvidado pero ahora lo recuerdo". Implica que en el pasado lo olvidaste y que ahora te acordás.


----------



## heidita

mariente said:


> Y dale con he olvidado algo. El he olvidado algo no está en cuestión. He olvidado es I have forgotten e implica que AUN NO RECORDÁS LA CUESTIÓN.
> En español está mal decir: he olvidado algo pero ahora lo recuerdo, porque tal me hizo acordar. No tiene sentido, porque en español he olvidado algo implica que todavía no recordas y no se puede olvidar y recordar al mismo tiempo. Por lo tanto es "lo habia olvidado pero ahora lo recuerdo". Implica que en el pasado lo olvidaste y que ahora te acordás.


 
Chica,  ¡menos mal! Eso lo llevo yo diciendo hace rato. No he podido resistir....


----------



## cuchuflete

Ivy29 said:


> Ivy29 : Here I have a question *since the past perfect moves between the past and **present*.  *a more distant past.
> *


----------



## mariente

Pero yo tambien estoy diciendo esto desde hace rato, hace un monton de posts que estoy explicandole lo mismo a Ivy


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Y dale con he olvidado algo. El he olvidado algo no está en cuestión. He olvidado es I have forgotten e implica que AUN NO RECORDÁS LA CUESTIÓN.
> En español está mal decir: he olvidado algo pero ahora lo recuerdo, porque tal me hizo acordar. No tiene sentido, porque en español he olvidado algo implica que todavía no recordas y no se puede olvidar y recordar al mismo tiempo. Por lo tanto es "lo habia olvidado pero ahora lo recuerdo". Implica que en el pasado lo olvidaste y que ahora te acordás.


 
*He olvidado las llaves del carro, y no me recuerdo dónde las dejé, pero mi esposa me hace recordar que las dejé en el baño ( ahora recuerdo gracias a ella). Tomo las llaves del carro y manejo hasta el trabajo. El contexto es importante.*

*Ivy29*


----------



## mariente

No entiendo a dónde querés llegar
*TE REPITO QUE NO PODES OLVIDAR ALGO Y ACORDARTE AL MISMO TIEMPO

Esa oración en español es incorrecta, ese parrafo debería ser todo en presente porque el texto habla todo en presente. No lo digo con mala intención pero creo que antes de aprender inglés deberías conocer tu idioma nativo primero, veo que tenés muchas dificultades con el español
*


----------



## Ivy29

Sorry, cuchuflete,  I corrected  it already should be read as : *the present perfect moves between* the *past* and present.. This is the question.

Thanks
Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> *he present perfect moves between* the *past* and present.. This is the question.


Eso sí es correcto, lo que esta mal es tu oración en español, y por consiguiente tu traduccion al ingles como present perfect de la misma


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> No entiendo a dónde querés llegar
> *TE REPITO QUE NO PODES OLVIDAR ALGO Y ACORDARTE AL MISMO TIEMPO*
> 
> *Esa oración en español es incorrecta, ese parrafo debería ser todo en presente porque el texto habla todo en presente.No lo digo con mala intención pero creo que antes de aprender inglés deberías conocer tu idioma nativo primero, veo que tenés muchas dificultades con el español*


 
Estás equivocado, amigo. *El olvidar no es eterno*. Además el presente perfecto en castellano tiene un pasado con resultados en el presente.
He olvidado las llaves, pues  no las encontré en mi bolsillo del saco y no  pude poner en marcha el carro, este es el resultado de olvidar las llaves que las dejé en el baño, pero mi esposa me recordó que las he dejado en el baño.  El olvidar está en un presente perfecto, cuyo pasado está en conexión con el presente. Estoy narrando y explicando mi oración compleja a ti. El presente perfecto no es un tiempo perfectivo como no lo es el pasado imperfecto.
Te recomiendo, esto tampoco tiene mala intención, REPASAR la dislocación temporal de los verbos en un capítulo extensísimo de la monumental obra de NEBRIJA-BELLO vol. 2. Numeral 44.5.2, a veces por no saber estos detalles te precipitas a decir cosas que no son. Entre las miles de dislocaciones de indicativo esta es una, y el conocido uso del IMPERFECTO de subjuntivo en presente, pasado y futuro; el IMPERFECTO pasado un uso hipotético debían ahorcarlos por deberían ahorcarlos, serán las cuatro de la tarde, el que yo sea médico no quiere decir nada, falso subjuntivo, pues soy médico, el pretérito imperfecto de conato, etc. etc. mi amigo MAriente. Nuestro idioma no está en un corral para niños donde se le limita, se le constriñe, y no se le deja volar correctamente debido a las falencias propias de nuestras limitaciones humanas.
se usa la forma canté expresa  con relaciones de antepresente y ante futuro :
aún no llegaron por aún NO HAN LLEGADO; cuando lleguen ya me fui por me habré ido. estas son una de las miles de dislocaciones del rico idioma castellano.

El conocimiento te amplía el panorama y la vista casi sin horizontes con la humildad de Sócrates sé que  nada sé, mi amigo Marientes.

Feliz tarde
Ivy29


----------



## .   1

I have forgotten but now I remember makes no logical sense.
The act of forgetting is not a continuous process.  Once a thing is forgotten it is forgotten.  The forgetter does nothing.  It sounds silly to say I have forgotten up until now because it gives the impression that the forgetting was a linear process like remembering but forgetting is not linear but final.
Once remembered it can not be said that the person knew the thing for all of the past.  There is a gap in the memory.  The memory has been returned but there is still a gap.

.,,


----------



## .   1

cuchuflete said:


> I have been looking out the window at the river and I see a flock of geese marching across the road, so I go to find something to feed them.


That looks to be all in the same tense but it just sounds weird. Too many things are represented as occurring simultaneously. 
It is a very confusing sentence.
I do not know if this is being spoken from the future about the past because to write about the present in this way knowing that the act of writing makes the reader view the action from the future therefore the reader sees a past event being referred to as the present but must translate the tenses is too much of a mind spin.

.,,


----------



## cuchuflete

. said:


> That looks to be all in the same tense but it just sounds weird. Too many things are represented as occurring simultaneously.
> It is a very confusing sentence.
> 
> 
> .,,


 You are right.  It's a very simplified parallel of the 'sitting in my car' example, without any reference to the past.
Imagine it as narration, or a letter you are writing to a friend to describe your current activities.

The point you make is a good one. It doesn't feel natural.
This is _not an idiomatic construction_ in English.  Normal English would use the past perfect and simple past to set the stage and describe an action.

This is also an example of the kind of thing I've often seen in grammar books.  They illustrate a rule or set of rules by examples that do not occur in the real world.  This does a terrible disservice to the hard working student, who assumes that every word in the text book should be taken literally, as it was written by "an authority".  

How would I write those same thoughts in normal English?
First, I would use more than one sentence.  That is key to avoiding confusion about tenses.

Narration: (Or a journal entry)
I've been sitting here, daydreaming and staring out the window. Some big, stupid birds are crossing the road. I think I'll go get some stale bread for them. 

Description:
I had been sitting there, just staring out the window, when I saw some geese marching across the road.  I went to look for something to feed them.


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> I have forgotten but now I remember makes no logical sense.
> The act of forgetting is not a continuous process. Once a thing is forgotten it is forgotten. The forgetter does nothing. It sounds silly to say I have forgotten up until now because it gives the impression that the forgetting was a linear process like remembering but forgetting is not linear but final.
> Once remembered it can not be said that the person knew the thing for all of the past. There is a gap in the memory. The memory has been returned but there is still a gap.
> 
> I have forgotten the keys, someone make me remember where I left them, them I go to pick them and drive to my work.
> 
> AMNESIA is a medical illness where a situation is permanent, Alzaheimers' a progressive one, aged transitory etc. But the daily happenings are transitory, you may have forgotten sth but due to a person that makes you to recall it you recover what you have forgotten before.
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

. said:


> I have forgotten but now I remember makes no logical sense.
> The act of forgetting is not a continuous process. Once a thing is forgotten it is forgotten. The forgetter does nothing. It sounds silly to say I have forgotten up until now because it gives the impression that the forgetting was a linear process like remembering but forgetting is not linear but final.
> Once remembered it can not be said that the person knew the thing for all of the past. There is a gap in the memory. The memory has been returned but there is still a gap.
> 
> That's correct but you can rescue the normal and frequently forgotten thing as a daily occurrence. But someone even yourself after a while remembers the things or event or actions you have forgotten transitorily.
> The present pefect is very close in meaning with the simple past but connected with the present. WE have in Spanish timing dislocations of the verbs we can use the simple past with the present perfect, or the future timing, even the conditional or subjunctive.
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> Estás equivocado, amigo. *El olvidar no es eterno*. Además el presente perfecto en castellano tiene un pasado con resultados en el presente.
> He olvidado las llaves, pues  no las encontré en mi bolsillo del saco y no  pude poner en marcha el carro, este es el resultado de olvidar las llaves que las dejé en el baño, pero mi esposa me recordó que las he dejado en el baño.  El olvidar está en un presente perfecto, cuyo pasado está en conexión con el presente. Estoy narrando y explicando mi oración compleja a ti. El presente perfecto no es un tiempo perfectivo como no lo es el pasado imperfecto.
> Te recomiendo, esto tampoco tiene mala intención, REPASAR la dislocación temporal de los verbos en un capítulo extensísimo de la monumental obra de NEBRIJA-BELLO vol. 2. Numeral 44.5.2, a veces por no saber estos detalles te precipitas a decir cosas que no son.
> Feliz tarde
> Ivy29


No se puede olvidar algo y acordarte al mismo tiempo, así que bajá un cambio con el tonito. En ese caso dirias, si hablas en pasado sería:
*Había olvidado las llaves del carro, y no me recordaba dónde las había dejado, pero mi esposa me hizo recordar que las había dejado en el baño ( ahora recuerdo gracias a ella). Tomé las llaves del carro y manejé hasta el trabajo. El contexto es importante.

Si hablás en presente:
**He olvidado las llaves del carro, y no  recuerdo dónde las dejé, pero mi esposa me hace recordar que las dejé en el baño ( ahora recuerdo gracias a ella). Tomo las llaves del carro y manejo hasta el trabajo. El contexto es importante.

Con respeto a: **He olvidado las llaves del carro, y no me recuerdo dónde las dejé,**pero mi esposa me hace recordar que las dejé en el baño --> no tiene nada que ver con la oración que yo planteé en la cual va past perfect. Esta bien, esta correcta esta oración, pero se aleja de lo que estamos discutiendo.

En la oración original yo pregunté

a: sabés que x?
b: aaah cierto me habia olvidado. 
Como traducir me habia olvidado, eso pregunté, si iba past perfect o present perfect, en un DIALOGO, no en una narración de una historia, por eso te dije que tu oración estaba mal, esta mal para lo que se esta discutiendo en este tema. Creo que tal vez deberías releer un poco los mensajes de por qué es past perfect
*


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> No se puede olvidar algo y acordarte al mismo tiempo, así que bajá un cambio con el tonito. En ese caso dirias, si hablas en pasado sería:
> *Había olvidado las llaves del carro, y no me recordaba dónde las había dejado, pero mi esposa me hizo recordar que las había dejado en el baño ( ahora recuerdo gracias a ella). Tomé las llaves del carro y manejé hasta el trabajo. El contexto es importante.*
> 
> *Si hablás en presente:*
> *He olvidado las llaves del carro, y no recuerdo dónde las dejé, pero mi esposa me hace recordar que las dejé en el baño ( ahora recuerdo gracias a ella). Tomo las llaves del carro y manejo hasta el trabajo. El contexto es importante.*
> 
> *Puedes decir en castellano :*
> *He olvidado las llavesdel carro, ...mi esposa me hizo recordar/dislocación  temporal por ANTEPRESENTE.*
> *He olvidad las llaves del carro...Mi esposa me ha hecho recordar/me hace recordar.*
> *Leer Colección Nebrija-Bello sobre dislocación temporal.*
> 
> 
> 
> Ivy29


----------



## Iliana

heidita said:


> Esta frase no es ni _correcta ni hermosa_ _ni lógica_ en castellano. No sé en colombiano, pero en castellano no lo es.
> 
> Había olvidado algo, David me lo recordó....


Lamento no poder citar la fuente (tiene años que lo leí en un libro), pero leí que en ciertas regiones de Latinoamérica y España se usa el antepresente en vez del pretérito... y aunque suene extraño, su uso no es incorrecto, cuando menos en español.


----------



## lazarus1907

mariente said:


> Había olvidado las llaves del carro, y no *me* recordaba dónde las había dejado,...


Que me perdonen si esto es normal en algún país, pero ese uso pronominal de "recordarse algo" me suena a mí fatal. Me alegro de que esta vez no sea el único:



> En el habla culta formal se desaconseja el uso de _recordar_ en forma pronominal, ya sea como transitivo (_recordarse_ [algo]):  _ «A veces no *me *recuerdo qué diablos hice ayer»
> 
> __Diccionario panhispánico de dudas ©2005
> Real Academia Española © Todos los derechos reservados_


----------



## mariente

Sí, esta mal se recordaba, super recontra mal, lo cité de otra persona y me olvidé de corregirlo, yo jamás podria haber escrito eso. 
Y por otro lado en un dialogo digo yo, no una narración, ok?


----------



## lazarus1907

Iliana said:


> Lamento no poder citar la fuente (*hace* años que lo leí en un libro), pero leí que en ciertas regiones de Latinoamérica y España se usa el antepresente en vez del pretérito... y aunque suene extraño, su uso no es incorrecto, cuando menos en español.


Pues yo creo que tiene su lógica, pues el pretérito perfecto se usa para referirse a un hecho que está de algún modo conectado con el presente, o que se encuentra en una zona temporal que engloba el presente. Si dices que has olvidado algo, esto ha de ser cierto aún en el presente, así que ¿cómo es posible que te lo hayan recordado pero aún lo tengas olvidado? No tiene sentido.

La frase de Heidi suena mucho mejor. Además, creí que el pretérito perfecto apenas se usa en América, ¿no? Que me corrijan si me equivoco, por favor.


----------



## lazarus1907

mariente said:


> Sí, esta mal se recordaba, super recontra mal, lo cité de otra persona y me olvidé de corregirlo, yo jamás podria haber escrito eso.
> Y por otro lado en un dialogo digo yo, no una narración, ok?


No pasa nada. Todos metemos la pata de vez en cuando, pero el "ok?" no te lo perdono, jeje.


----------



## mariente

Lo del ok, y eso de la narracion fue para ivy no para vos. Quise decir que la oración el cuestión es parte de un dialogo y no de una narración, por eso esta bien la oracion que plantea, sí, esta bien en una narración, pero no lo está en un dialogo


----------



## Ivy29

lazarus1907 said:


> Que me perdonen si esto es normal en algún país, pero ese uso pronominal de "recordarse algo" me suena a mí fatal. Me alegro de que esta vez no sea el único:


 
Esto me hace recordar que aquí en Colombia el culo de la botella es casi prohibido en salones refinados, decimos el fondo de la botella, la base.
Esto casi produce un incidente con la señora de uno de nuestros embajadores en un refinado retaurante de Madrid, donde el mesero le dijo a la señora que estaba saludando a una amiga: por favor aparte su *ulo que voy pasando. Casi se forma un lío. LOL

Curioso la *última edición del diccionario de la RAE* lo trae como pronominal
<<recordar.(Del lat. recordāri).1. tr. Traer a la memoria algo. U. t. c. intr.2. tr. *Hacer presente a alguien algo de que se hizo cargo o que tomó a su cuidado. U. t. c. intr. y c. prnl*.3. tr. Dicho de una persona o de una cosa: Semejar a otra.4. intr. Ast., León, Arg., Col., Ecuad., Méx. y R. Dom. despertar (ǁ dejar de dormir). U. t. c. prnl.>>>>>


Ivy29


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Lo del ok, y eso de la narracion fue para ivy no para vos. Quise decir que la oración el cuestión es parte de un dialogo y no de una narración, por eso esta bien la oracion que plantea, sí, esta bien en una narración, pero no lo está en un dialogo


 
Acuérdate de leer la *dislocación temporal* de los tiempos en Nebrija-Bello, y de leer el uso PRONOMINAL de RECORDAR en el Diccionario última edición de la RAE. Y quítate la idea de que existe *recordar y olvidar simultáneamente*, puedes olvidar y segundo seguido recordar lo mismo. 
Yo puedo decir : He olvidado algo y alguien me lo hizo recordar/me ha hecho recordar. EN ESPAÑOL. He preguntado a cuchuflete si en Inglés también existe timing dislocation y se pudiera usar el simple past.

Saludos
Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Ivy29 said:


> Acuérdate de leer la *dislocación temporal* de los tiempos en Nebrija-Bello, y de leer el uso PRONOMINAL de RECORDAR en el Diccionario última edición de la RAE. Y quítate la idea de que existe *recordar y olvidar simultáneamente*, puedes olvidar y segundo seguido recordar lo mismo.
> Yo puedo decir : He olvidado algo y alguien me lo hizo recordar/me ha hecho recordar. EN ESPAÑOL. He preguntado a cuchuflete si en Inglés también existe timing dislocation y se pudiera usar el simple past.
> 
> Saludos
> Ivy29


*"he olvidado algo y alguien me lo hizo recordar/me ha hecho recordar"*
No te estoy diciendo que esta oración esté mal aunque tampoco puedo decir que está bien, realmente me suena muy rara e incorrecta, ya que "he olvidado algo" algo implica que aún seguís sin acordartelo.

sino que esta oración esta mal 

a: sabes que x?
b: aaa cierto, lo he olvidado!--> ya que lo correcto es: aaa cierto, lo había olvidado (porque ahora ya te acordás)
Que es la de tu traducción al inglés con present perfect


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> *"he olvidado algo y alguien me lo hizo recordar/me ha hecho recordar"*
> No te estoy diciendo que esta oración esté mal aunque tampoco puedo decir que está bien, realmente me suena muy rara e incorrecta, ya que "he olvidado algo" algo implica que aún seguís sin acordartelo.
> 
> sino que esta oración esta mal
> 
> a: sabes que x?
> b: aaa cierto, lo he olvidado!--> ya que lo correcto es: aaa cierto, lo había olvidado (porque ahora ya te acordás)
> Que es la de tu traducción al inglés con present perfect


 
Está bien ambas. 
Perdona, según el contexto, ambas son correctas.
SITUACIÓN presente. Diálogo en presente.

he olvidado ( el verbo olvidar es estático) olvidas algo y punto. To be or not to be.y luego aunque sea una milésima de segundo después alguien te hace recordar eso que olvidaste transitoriamento el lugar dónde dejaste las llaves, vas por ellas coges el carro y manejas a la oficina. Este es presente perfecto. En Inglés y Español. 

En un dialogo narrando algo pasado ( reported speech)

Había olvidado las llaves del carro ayer/esta mañana si estás en la tarde de ese día pero mi  mujer me recordó que las había dejado/o las dejé en el baño, fui por ellas y conducí a la oficina.
*El olvidar ya está olvidado* pero con resultados en el presente. Este es el presente perfecto, el único tiempo de presente compuesto que tiene una acción pasada, anterior al momento del habla y produce resultados en el presente.
De ahí mi pregunta a cuchuflete que si se podía usar el pasado pues en castellano es muy frecuente la dislocación temporal del pasado simple por el presente perfecto, que creo existe en Inglés también.

Ivy29


----------



## mariente

Lo que decís no es correcto, tanto en español como inglés, ya te lo dijo todo el mundo. "He olvidado algo" implica que aún seguís sin acordarte. Misma regla que inglés: accion que comeinza en el pasado--> olvidar, que sigue en el presente: he olvidado. Si te lo olvidaste y punto sería me olvidé, ahí esta completa la acción.  No menciona nada acerca del presente. Lo he olvidado  implica que aun no recordás. 
Yo por mi parte me retiro de esta discusión, (no del topic que es interesante) porque no tiene sentido hablar con alguien  que  está equivocado y que piensa que tiene razón. Te dejo con tu incorrecto ingles y tu incorrecto español. A mí ya me han han aclarado mi duda


----------



## Ivy29

mariente said:


> Lo que decís no es correcto, tanto en español como inglés, ya te lo dijo todo el mundo. "He olvidado algo" implica que aún seguís sin acordarte. Misma regla que inglés: accion que comeinza en el pasado--> olvidar, que sigue en el presente: he olvidado. Si te lo olvidaste y punto sería me olvidé, ahí esta completa la acción. No menciona nada acerca del presente. Lo he olvidado implica que aun no recordás.
> Yo por mi parte me retiro de esta discusión, (no del topic que es interesante) porque no tiene sentido hablar con alguien que está equivocado y que piensa que tiene razón. Te dejo con tu incorrecto ingles y tu incorrecto español. A mí ya me han han aclarado mi duda


 
*En Español el que no tiene la razón eres tú*, mi amigo. *El olvidar no es una sucesión de olvidos*, se olvida y PUNTO pero si algo te hace recordar lo que olvidaste, transitorio: las llaves, el pase de conducir, un papel etc, entonces recuerdas y buscas lo que se te olvidó.. Tu problema para entender es que crees que *el olvidar se sucedió en el presente* GRAN ERROR sucedió en el pasado con RESULTADOS en el presente, cuáles rsultados no tener las llaves, el pase, los papeles, etc. claro que si NARRAS un hecho en el pasado lo haces con pasado simple, pasado compuesto, pero una cosa es una cosa y otra cosa es otra. 
Acuérdate de leer la dislocación temporal de los verbos que es abundantísima en castellano. Y de contera repasa el presente perfecto en castellano.

Ivy29
Feliz tarde.


----------



## mariente

Una pregunta: por qué encuentro en un chat room lo siguiente:
"Mary found the word" para una acción reciente?y the word was found? no debería usar el present perfect? o es este el caso en que peuden unsarse indistamente ambos? 
Todas son una acción muy reciente


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:

En este caso "has found" y "found" son igual.  "has found" tiene un poco más precisión del tiempo (reciente) de "found" si la necesita.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

Ah ya veo, entonces ya encontré cuando el present perfect y el simple past pueden usarse indistantamente: recent actions


----------



## mariente

Está bien lo que digo, no?


----------



## mazbook

Sí ¡Cierto!

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

Gracias, entonces creo que ya terminó mi problema.


----------



## mariente

Otra cosa más: también en una acción sin referencia en el pasado?
por ejemplo en este caso: i went to New york twice. O necesariamente requiero de un contexto que me de la referencia? gracias!


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:





mariente said:


> Otra cosa más: también en una acción sin referencia en el pasado?
> por ejemplo en este caso: i went to New york twice. O necesariamente requiero de un contexto que me de la referencia? gracias!


"I went to New York twice." = "I have gone to New York twice."  Los dos son correctos y común.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

Thank you! ¿pero no  es imprescindible la referencia del tiempo en el simple past no?


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:





mariente said:


> Thank you! ¿pero no  es imprescindible la referencia del tiempo en el simple past no?


"I went to New York." suena incompleta si no es el respuesto de una pregunta como, "Where did you go for your vacation?" o una referencia del tiempo es en la oración siguente.  Pero "I have gone to New York." suena bien en todos casos.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

Me surgió otra duda. Viendo Heman and Shera the secret of the sword encontré esto

you are the one i came to find--> eres quien vine a buscar, que también podría traducirse como: eres quien he venido a buscar, la cual me suena mejor pero es lo mismo verdad? y para el caso valen los 2 tanto como inglés como en español verdad?


----------



## Redline2200

mariente said:


> Me surgió otra duda. Viendo Heman and Shera the secret of the sword encontré esto
> 
> you are the one i came to find--> eres quien vine a buscar, que también podría traducirse como: eres quien he venido a buscar, la cual me suena mejor pero es lo mismo verdad? y para el caso valen los 2 tanto como inglés como en español verdad?


 
Ya que soy angloparlante puedo ayudarte con la segunda parte de tu pregunta pero voy a dejar que los hispanoparlantes contesten la primera parte.
En inglés, hay una diferencia (obviamente, como en castellano también) entre
*You are the one I came to find.*
y
*You are the one I have come to find.*
Sin embargo, creo que en este caso los dos suenan bien y se podrían usar ambas frases.


----------



## mazbook

Redline2200 said:


> Ya que soy angloparlante puedo ayudarte con la segunda parte de tu pregunta pero voy a dejar que los hispanoparlantes contesten la primera parte.
> En inglés, hay una diferencia (obviamente, como en castellano también) entre
> *You are the one I came to find.*
> y
> *You are the one I have come to find.*
> Sin embargo, creo que en este caso los dos suenan bien y se podrían usar ambas frases.


Para mi, en la conversación normal, los dos son iguales.  Conozco, la segunda tiene una diferencia semántica muy, muy menudo pero las mayorias veces los dos son iguales.  La diferencia semantica es (creo):

En la primera, él que habla conoce antes exactamente quien él busca.

En la segunda, él que habla possiblemente no conoce exactamente quien él busca pero tiene suficiente descripción para recogerlo cuando él lo ve.

Creo, en español la diferencia es del tiempo pero no es el caso en inglés.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## mariente

mazbook said:


> Para mi, en la conversación normal, los dos son iguales. Conozco, la segunda tiene una diferencia semántica muy, muy menudo pero las mayorias veces los dos son iguales. La diferencia semantica es (creo):
> 
> En la primera, él que habla conoce antes exactamente quien él busca.
> 
> En la segunda, él que habla possiblemente no conoce exactamente quien él busca pero tiene suficiente descripción para recogerlo cuando él lo ve.
> 
> Creo, en español la diferencia es del tiempo pero no es el caso en inglés.
> 
> Saludos desde Mazatlán



En español me suenan bien las 2  para el mismo significado. En cuanto a lo que vos decís, bueno el no sabía a quien iba a buscar hasta que se dió cuenta de que la encontró. Sin embargo creo que en esta frase ambas son iguales. Y por lo que veo que dicen son iguales


----------



## mariente

Está bien lo que digo no?


----------



## mazbook

Hola mariente:

¡Sí, cierto! y gracias por su corrección de mi conocido de español.

Saludos desde Mazatlán


----------



## JaCoX

Hola a todos!
Soy nuevo en este foro, y tengo muchas preguntas. 

El mes pasado no obtuve una muy buena nota en mis clases de Ingles pase con 88/100 

Todo por la culpa de el Present Perfect vs Simple Past, resulta que en la parte de preguntas que tengo que formular me vino esta:

Pregunta al entrevistado sobre sus actividades despues de su graduación.
Yo sin dudar puse, 

- What have you done after your graduation?

Hubo otra pregunta del mismo tipo y ambas estuvieron incorrectas.
En la corrección ví que la respuesta correcta era:

- What did you do after your graduation?

Ayuda porfavor =(


----------



## pankurst

Para empezar, la diferencia fundamental entre el present perfect y el past simple en inglés es que el present perfect tiene algún tipo de conexión con el presente y el past simple es pasado y sólo pasado. Hay varios tipos de conexiones pasado-presente en las que usamos el present perfect.

La primera que suele enseñarse a los hablantes no nativos de inglés es que el present perfect se utiliza para hablar de experiencias en la vida de alguien que sigue vivo: *I've been to New York twice* (no "I've gone" pero ése es otro tema). El periodo de tiempo del que hablamos es "en toda mi vida, desde el pasado hasta ahora, desde el pasado hasta el presente". He ahí la conexión pasado-presente. 

Si comparamos esa frase con *My grandfather went to New York twice*, vemos que "my grandfather" está muerto porque ahora estamos hablando en past simple, es decir, no hay conexión pasado-presente. El tiempo del que hablamos (la vida de mi abuelo) empezó y acabó en el pasado.

Así que lamento tener que contradecir a Mazbook, pero no es lo mismo "I've been to New York twice" y "I went to New York twice".

Eso en lo que respecta a experiencias vitales. Pues lo mismo ocurre con periodos de tiempo más cortos que las vidas de las personas, por ejemplo: yesterday, last week, today, at 4 o'clock, etc.

*I went to New York last year/last February. *Aquí no podemos usar el present perfect porque no hay una conexión pasado-presente: "last year/last February" es un tiempo que empezó y acabó en el pasado. Es como cuando hablo de la vida de mi abuelo: empezó en el pasado y acabó en el pasado, nada que ver con el presente.

*I've been to New York this year.* Aquí sí que usamos el present perfect porque existe una conexión pasado-presente: "this year" empezó en el pasado pero continúa en el presente, es como cuando hablo de mi vida, si estoy viva, claro: mi vida empezó en el pasado y continúa en el presente.

Por supuesto, de ello se deduce que un mismo hecho puede expresarse de manera diferente dependiendo de los complementos temporales que lo acompañen: Si ahora es junio y yo viajé a Nueva York en febrero, puedo utilizar tanto "I went to New York in February" o "I've been to New York this year".

Por otra parte, las expresiones que indican tiempo no tienen que ser exclusivamente adverbios: como bien dice Mazbook, "*What did you do in your holidays? I went to New York."* está en past simple porque las "holidays" o vacaciones empezaron y acabaron en el pasado, igual que "last year", "yesterday" o la vida de mi abuelo. De la misma manera, en respuesta a la pregunta de JaCoX, "*What did you do after your graduation?"* tiene que estar en past simple porque el tiempo "after your graduation" empezó y terminó en el pasado. Aquí nos falta un poco de contexto pero la situación podría ser la siguiente, por poner un ejemplo: es una entrevista de trabajo y el entrevistador quiere saber qué es lo que hizo el entrevistado justo después de graduarse y ahora (es decir, el presente) no es justo después de graduarse.

La diferencia entre "*You are the one I came to find*" y "*You are the one I've come to find*" es, de nuevo, la misma. Falta contexto pero, por poner un ejemplo, digamos que dos abueletes que han estado casados muchos años se ponen a hablar del porqué el varón emigró a EEUU, por ejemplo, porque resulta que él era de París. Pues, en ese caso, le dice a su mujer "*You are the one I came to find*". La acción de "come" es en un pasado que nada tiene que ver con el presente, es decir, "You are... I came to find when I was young/when I emigrated...". "When I was young" o "when I emigrated" son tiempos que nada tienen que ver con el presente, el abuelete ya no está emigrando ni es joven, así que son tiempos que empezaron y acabaron en el pasado. 

La otra frase "*You are the one I've come to find" *se la diría un chico joven que acaba de emigrar a su novia porque la acción de venir es tan reciente que prácticamente es ahora. En este ejemplo, nos estaríamos centrando en otro tipo de conexión pasado presente, el de cercanía al presente, es decir, si una acción es reciente. Pero aquí ya tendría que explayarme mucho más para entrar en este tema.

Así que creo que, por hoy, lo dejo ahí. En fin, espero que algo haya quedado más claro. Por supuesto que existen más tipos de conexiones pasado presente pero, de momento, creo que ya me he enrollado bastante. Sólo me gustaría añadir que lo explicado se refiere al inglés británico porque me consta que hay ciertas diferencias en este aspecto con el norteamericano: los británicos tienden a usar más el present perfect y los norteamericanos el past simple. Y, por último, no podemos comparar el past simple y el present perfect con el pretérito indefinido o, según la RAE, pretérito perfecto simple, y el pretérito perfecto o pretérido perfecto compuesto (RAE) porque, al tratarse de dos idiomas diferentes, los usos de estos tiempos no se corresponden totalmente.


----------

