
Look at these examples to see how the past perfect is used.
He couldn't make a sandwich because he'd forgotten to buy bread.
The hotel was full, so I was glad that we'd booked in advance.
My new job wasn't exactly what I’d expected.
Try this exercise to test your grammar.
- Grammar test 1
Read the explanation to learn more.
Grammar explanation
Time up to a point in the past
We use the past perfect simple (had + past participle) to talk about time up to a certain point in the past.
She'd published her first poem by the time she was eight.
We'd finished all the water before we were halfway up the mountain.
Had the parcel arrived when you called yesterday?
Past perfect for the earlier of two past actions
We can use the past perfect to show the order of two past events. The past perfect shows the earlier action and the past simple shows the later action.
When the police arrived, the thief had escaped.
It doesn't matter in which order we say the two events. The following sentence has the same meaning.
The thief had escaped when the police arrived.
Note that if there's only a single event, we don't use the past perfect, even if it happened a long time ago.
The Romans spoke Latin. (NOT
The Romans had spoken Latin.)
Past perfect with before
We can also use the past perfect followed by before to show that an action was not done or was incomplete when the past simple action happened.
They left before I'd spoken to them.
Sadly, the author died before he'd finished the series.
Adverbs
We often use the adverbs already (= 'before the specified time'), still (= as previously), just (= 'a very short time before the specified time'), ever (= 'at any time before the specified time') or never (= 'at no time before the specified time') with the past perfect.
I called his office but he'd already left.
It still hadn't rained at the beginning of May.
I went to visit her when she'd just moved to Berlin.
It was the most beautiful photo I'd ever seen.
Had you ever visited London when you moved there?
I'd never met anyone from California before I met Jim.
Do this exercise to test your grammar again.
- Grammar test 2
Hello shubhamgupta,
I had a car tells us about a specific time, and there must be a reference to that time either in the sentence (I had a car in 2005 / I had a car when I was a student) or implied in the context.
I have had a car does not refer to a specific time (and it would be ungrammatical to provide one), but rather tells us about your life as a whole.
We would say I told you he woud take the girl when either the girl has already been taken or we have some information to tell us that it is certain.
We would say I told you he will take the girl when we still do not know if it will happen or not, and are reminding the other person of our prediction.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Sridhar reddy
Thanks for your comment! We hope you learn a lot here and look forward to seeing you around!
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello D8023,
We have a number of pages dealing with these verb forms in our main grammar section and in our Intermediate grammar section.
It's not really possible for us to provide long explanations in the comments sections, but if you have a particular example which you find confusing then we'll be happy to try to clarify it for you.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi D8023
In this case, only 'I had worked' (había trabajado) is the correct form (not 'have worked' -- he trabajado). The sequence of events is this: 1. you started working in the factory, 2. the factory closed, 3. you were sorry. By saying 'had worked', it's clear that your working there was before the factory closed and you were sorry.
If you said 'have worked', it suggests that you are still working there now. This doesn't make sense since earlier you said the factory already closed. If you said Estuve triste cuando la fábrica cerró. He trabajado ahí desde que dejé el colegio it would sound strange, right? It would sound the same way in English.
The present perfect always refers to or touches the present time in some way -- its reference point is the present--whereas the past perfect has a past time as a reference point.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello D8023,
The past perfect is correct there, though the sentence has a small error You could say:
or
The past perfect is used because the action (waiting) began in the past and continued up to another time in the past (the bus's arrival).
You could say the same thing about an action which began in the past (waiting) and continued up to the present (the moment of speaking). In this case you would use the present perfect:
or
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello shubhamgupta,
It's a little hard to tell without knowing the exact situation, but I think the past perfect or past simple could be used here. The woman is talking about a time in the past (not having the phone) and you are asking about something earlier which is related to this (giving the phone to her roommate)
My phone was not with me, it was with my roommate.
Why had you even given your phone to her? / Why did you even give your phone to her?
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello shubhamgupta,
As far as I know, 'crore' isn't used much outside of South Asia. As someone who's spent some time there, I recognised that it was a term used in Indian English, but I'm not sure most native speakers would. I think 'inject' or some other word might also be more common than 'infuse', but I'm not really sure.
Hope this helps you.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Goncharush,
Both forms are possible and I can't think of any context in which only one would be possible.
There is no need to change 'last'.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Goncharush,
You are right in thinking that both 'works' and 'worked' are grammatically correct in this case. When the verb is in the present simple, it indicates that he still works there at the time of speaking. When the verb is in the past simple, the meaning is ambiguous: it could indicate the same as the present simple, or it could be speaking only about the past. Context should usually make the meaning clear, though it's also possible for the sentence to be unintentionally ambiguous.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello andreus1999,
Simple forms can include duration:
We use progressive aspect when an action is interrupted by another event:
There are other uses of progressive aspect. You can read about them on this page.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Aya salah,
It's really difficult for us to explain this without the context, as there are so many possibilities and to explain them takes quite a bit of effort on our part. But, to try to help you, note that the past perfect doesn't make sense if there isn't some other past reference point. I suppose that's why this sentence was corrected this way.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello bakh.sh85,
You are welcome to ask us questions about question tags or other topics. We only ask that you ask them on the most relevant page you can find. For example, to ask about question tags, the most logical page would be our question tags page, but since there is no space for comments there, the next most relevant is probably questions and negatives.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello bakh.sh85,
The relationships between different verb forms are quite nuanced. For example:
When she called, I went out. [I left at the moment she called, possibly as a result of the call]
When she called, I had gone out. [I was not at home when she called]
When she called, I was going out. [I was in the process of leaving when she called]
Both the sentences about immigration are possible. Without knowing the context in which they are used, I cannot say which is better.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi elaliyev,
The sentence is correct – well done.
However, please note that the past perfect is not used because the actions are in sequence. To describe a sequence of actions we use the past simple:
I read the documents again before I made the phone call.
We use the past perfect because there is some relationship between the earlier action and the later one. It may be that the earlier action causes or allows the later one, or influences it in some way. In your example, the email is sent as a result of the reinbursement, and so the past perfect is appropriate as it signals this relationship.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello shubhamgupta,
You're right in thinking that there are separate events that occur in a sequence, but this doesn't mean that they both have to be mentioned in the same sentence. I expect that somewhere in the sentences before sentence 1, another event, subsequent to the invitation, is mentioned.
You can see some additional example sentences on this page.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello bak.sh85,
There are tendencies which work like this but please remember that they are not fixed rules. It is perfectly fine to use before + past simple + past perfect, for example, but it is also fine to use before + past simple + past simple. Pattterns like this can be misleading if you follow them as if they were rules. The context is key.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi bakh.sh85,
Like Peter, I'm a little hesitant to speak about 'rules', but I can say that your sentences are both correct and natural-sounding. I'd encourage you to focus on the meaning that the verb forms communicate to help remember them.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello shubhamgupta,
The first sentence, with the past perfect verb, puts more emphasis on the fact that the planned action was to happen earlier than the other one. You could use either sentence with no difference in meaning in most any context I can think of.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi jityo,
1) 'was abandoned' is a passive construction in the past simple
2) We often use the passive voice when the subject of the verb is unknown. In this situation, we don't know who abandoned the child and the passive voice communicates this.
3) It's grammatically correct to say 'A baby boy abandoned', but it doesn't make much sense, since in general babies aren't even able to walk and therefore cannot abandon anyone or anything.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello katarey65,
The use of the past perfect is dependent on the context in which the action occurs. It describes one or more actions which occur before another action, and which in some way have an effect on, cause or change the later action.
In your sentence in isolation the correct forms is 'laughed', not 'had laughed'. However, there could be a context which makes 'had laughed' possible.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Callista,
Either form can work in that sentence. 'had been' emphasises the sequence (first treatments, then dismissal) more, but both are correct.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Aisha na Shadee,
The tenses in your sentence are all correct. Yes, the past simple can be used to narrate a sequence of past events; the past perfect wouldn't be appropriate here.
I would recommend breaking up the sentence into shorter pieces. For example, after 'late' and before 'try'.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team