# have/had previously stated



## Phoebe1200

School of rock, TV show
Context: The scene opens with the teacher, Mr. Finn, (who's not really an actual teacher) in front of the class with a book.

*Mr. Finn*: Well, it says here I was wrong. Lightning is actually frozen moisture colliding creating a static charge and not as I *have*/*had *previously stated=two angles in a fist fight.

I can't make out which one he says and can't figure out which one it actually should be here without your help.


----------



## The Newt

Either would be acceptable, as would "and not as I previously stated."


----------



## heypresto

I think it could be either, but if you forced me at gunpoint to choose one, I'd say I preferred 'had'.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thank you, both.

I actually wasn't sure if the *present perfect* could be used with "previously". So it's OK to use the present perfect with "previously"?


----------



## George1992

I would also like to learn more about the meaning of "have previously stated". Does it mean that even though he was wrong he still states the fact?


----------



## wandle

'As I have previously stated' means 'as I have said before'. 'As' has the sense 'agreeing with'.

'Not as I have previously stated' means 'not agreeing with what I have said before'.


----------



## George1992

I asked a wrong question, wandle. I'm sorry. I know what it means. 

I'm not sure about the meaning of the present perfect. Once again -> Does it mean that even though he was wrong *he still states the fact*?


----------



## wandle

'Not as' means 'not agreeing with': he is correcting himself. He is taking back what he had said. The negative is decisive.

The significance of the present perfect in that context would simply be that the speaker was acknowledging that the previous explanation was still current in the pupils' minds at the time of speaking.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thank you for your replies.

Since he has realized that he was wrong it's better to use the past perfect "*had *previously stated" in the OP, right?


----------



## wandle

Phoebe1200 said:


> Since he has realized that he was wrong it's better to use the past perfect "*had *previously stated" in the OP, right?


The past perfect and present perfect both work.


wandle said:


> The significance of the present perfect in that context would simply be that the speaker was acknowledging that the previous explanation was still current in the pupils' minds at the time of speaking.


----------



## Glasguensis

George1992 said:


> I would also like to learn more about the meaning of "have previously stated". Does it mean that even though he was wrong he still states the fact?


No. It simply means that it is still true that he previously stated it.

Phoebe, both forms are equally acceptable.


----------



## George1992

I understand "I had previously stated". 

Now I also understand -> As I have previously stated = it is still true that he previously stated it.

I can't explain the meaning of the past simple tense -> As I previously stated = ???


----------



## london calling

heypresto said:


> I think it could be either, but if you forced me at gunpoint to choose one, I'd say I preferred 'had'.


Ditto.


----------



## Glasguensis

George1992 said:


> I understand "I had previously stated".
> 
> Now I also understand -> As I have previously stated = it is still true that he previously stated it.
> 
> I can't explain the meaning of the past simple tense -> As I previously stated = ???


It is a simple reference to a particular event in the past. Compare "As I stated during our previous meeting".

Note that in any particular situation all of these possibilities could be employed - it is merely the speaker's perspective which is different.


----------



## George1992

Glasguensis said:


> It is a simple reference to a particular event in the past. Compare "As I stated during our previous meeting".
> 
> Note that in any particular situation all of these possibilities could be employed - it is merely the speaker's perspective which is different.


----------



## Phoebe1200

So all three tenses (past simple, present perfect, past perfect) are interchangeable in the OP with no change in meaning?


----------



## Glasguensis

They do not mean exactly the same thing, as has already been stated. In the situation described all could be used and all would mean that what he was reading was different to what he had previously said.


----------



## Phoebe1200

If it's present perfect you said it means that it is still true that he previously stated it.

But what does past perfect mean?


----------



## Glasguensis

How many times do we have to go through this? The past perfect positions an action with respect to a time reference. In this case the time reference is him reading the real cause of lightning. Prior to this he had given a different explanation.


----------



## wandle

Phoebe1200 said:


> So all three tenses (past simple, present perfect, past perfect) are interchangeable in the OP with no change in meaning?


No. They are alternatives, each with a different meaning, which all work in that context.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thank you.


wandle said:


> each with a different meaning,


*Present perfect* means that it is still true that he previously stated it.
*Past perfect* means the time reference is him reading the real cause of lightning. Prior to this he had given a different explanation.

And past simple means?


----------



## Glasguensis

See post 14.


----------



## Phoebe1200

But in the OP *past simple* and* past perfect* have the same meaning, right?


----------



## Glasguensis

Wrong.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Please tell me what the time reference is in the OP if* past simple* is used.


----------



## Glasguensis

If the simple past is used there is no implicit time reference, other than being before the present moment.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Glasguensis said:


> If the simple past is used there is no implicit time reference, other than being before the present moment.


But isn't it the same with *past perfect* in the OP?


----------



## Glasguensis

No. Please read the previous explanations.


----------



## wandle

The past tense, at least in modern British usage, typically means that the speaker places the event in the past while mentally disconnecting it from the present.

The past perfect means that the speaker places the event not only in the past, but prior to another event already located at a point in the past. This involves three points in time: (a) the earlier past event, expressed in the past perfect tense, (b) the subsequent past event expressed (if mentioned) in the past tense and (c) the current time expressed (if mentioned) in the present tense.


----------



## siares

Phoebe1200 said:


> So it's OK to use the present perfect with "previously"?





George1992 said:


> I would also like to learn more about the meaning of "have previously stated".


I too was surprised to read that previously+ present perfect work.
See two native speakers here not wild about the combination: previously


----------



## Glasguensis

You have misinterpreted that thread. The first person to answer posted entirely consistently with what has been said here. The person who had a slightly different view dislikes the word "previously" in general and wouldn't use it with the present perfect himself, but it's a question of usage, not of grammar. We can use present perfect with words such as previously when we add a qualifier such as "three times". For this reason most native speakers use and accept the present perfect without a qualifier, with the understanding that there is an implicit qualifier of "on multiple occasions".


----------



## siares

I don't understand your post, it is too vague without quotes. For example, you say


Glasguensis said:


> The first person to answer posted entirely consistently with what has been said here.


The first person to answer said this:


Mike said:


> To be honest, I'd never use previously with present perfect.


although later he finds some examples normal.



Glasguensis said:


> You have misinterpreted that thread.


All I said is some speakers there are not wild about the construction. I would need a lot of persuasion to think they are!


Glasguensis said:


> the present perfect without a qualifier, with the understanding that there is an implicit qualifier of "on multiple occasions".


So, it would not work for a continous state - like: .... _as I have believed previously._?


----------



## Glasguensis

There is a difference between "personally I'd never say xxx" and "xxx is incorrect". Personally I'd never say "Indubitably!", but I recognise that it is a valid exclamation. The first poster gives an explanation of how to interpret the present perfect with "previously" which is exactly the same as the explanation given earlier in this thread.

I can't think of an example where it would work for a continuous state, no.


----------



## siares

Thanks Glasguensis, I get what the thread says.

I think I was never taught a difference in tense usage between previously and before. Could be because 'previously' is more rarely used?

I can't find any more threads on this.


----------



## Glasguensis

It's important to bear in mind that previously means "before x", and not "before now". For this reason it is more often used with the past perfect than the present perfect, but that doesn't preclude it being used altogether, although many native speakers will probably instinctively use a different phrasing.


----------



## siares

Thanks, Glasguensis.


----------



## Phoebe1200

wandle said:


> The past tense, at least in modern British usage, typically means that the speaker places the event in the past while mentally disconnecting it from the present.
> 
> The past perfect means that the speaker places the event not only in the past, but prior to another event already located at a point in the past. This involves three points in time: (a) the earlier past event, expressed in the past perfect tense, (b) the subsequent past event expressed (if mentioned) in the past tense and (c) the current time expressed (if mentioned) in the present tense.


Thank you.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Phoebe1200 said:


> And past simple means?





Glasguensis said:


> See post 14.





Glasguensis said:


> It is a simple reference to a particular event in the past. Compare "As I stated during our previous meeting".


Do you mean that it's the meaning of the OP if simple past was used that he stated it prior to the reading about the lighting?


----------



## Glasguensis

No, I do not mean that. It means that he has in mind a particular occasion when he said it. From the context we can *deduce* that this previous occasion must have been before he read the passage he is currently reading, but the simple past in itself does not convey anything about the time relationship, which makes it different from the past perfect, which does convey this.


----------



## Phoebe1200

Thank you very much for your reply, Glasguensis. But there's still one thing I don't understand.


Glasguensis said:


> It means that he has in mind a particular occasion when he said it. From the context we can *deduce* that this previous occasion must have been before he read the passage he is currently reading,





Phoebe1200 said:


> *Past perfect* means the time reference is him reading the real cause of lightning. Prior to this he had given a different explanation.


I thought that the *past perfect* is used for referring to something in the more distant past while the *past simple* to the more recent past. But from your explanations above it seems the other way around. That with past perfect the time reference is him reading the real cause of lightning (recent past); while with past simple, the time reference is further in the back before he even started reading the passage. (distant past) This is what's confusing me.


----------



## Glasguensis

As has been explained to you many times, the difference between past tenses has NOTHING TO DO WITH how far into the past something was. The simple past can be used for something which happened a second ago and for something which happened before the dawn of time. The past perfect is used to denote that something occurred prior to a specific past event, but both actions can be in the very recent or very distant past. I had just taken off my shoes when I remembered I had to go out again. This could be five minutes ago or in 1970. The point is that the past perfect (taking off my shoes) occurred prior to the simple past (remembering I had to go out).

In your example, although all three options have slightly different meanings, they all mean that he made his previous statement prior to reading the current text, and none of the three tell us anything about how long ago this was.


----------



## Phoebe1200

I really appreciate all your answers, Glasguensis. Thank you so much.


----------

