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 after before
We can also use before + past perfect 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
Dear Kirk,
Thank you very mcuh, Kirk for suggesting me to join the English online. I will do that.
I have a question for you, here. Please help me.
I understand the past tense has difference functions in English.
1. If you did it he would be angry (It is said in past tense but it is a futuristic statement - it is an imaginative sentence but indicates the future action)
2. He told me to do it until he came. (It is also past tense but it also indicates the future or present condition, because I am doing it at the moment until he returns)
And one more question on this second statement...
I can understand this sentence at the start (He told me to do it until...) but the last part of the sentence really annoys me, because the "coming" has not happened yet, but the tense is in a past form (he came). How can I understand this? I think if he has not come back yet it should be in a future tense (until he comes). Please clarify this for me and help me to understand this in a proper way.
Thank you,
Regards,
kingson
Hi kingson,
It depends on a) whether this person ('he') has already come at the time the speaker speaks this sentence, or b) whether he still hasn't come at the time of speaking.
If it's a), then the past simple form 'came' reports a past event and so the past tense form makes more sense.
If it's b) -- which I think is what you're asking about -- then it's also correct to say 'until he comes', since, as you point out, he hasn't arrived yet. In situation b) it's also correct to say 'until he came'; in this case, the past tense 'came' refers more to the moment in the past when he spoke to me than it does to the later time when he is due to come.
This definitely makes the sentence with 'until he came' more ambiguous. When it's important that there be no ambiguity, you could say 'until he comes' or add another phrase or sentence that makes it clear hasn't yet arrived.
I hope that makes sense!
Best wishes,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Kirk,
That's a fantastic explanation. Thank you so much.
So I acn also say " He told me to do it until he comes"
Is that right?
Regards,
kingson
Hello kingson,
Yes, that's right. If he still hasn't come when he say this sentence, you can say 'until he comes'.
Best wishes,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Team,
Which of the following is correct? Please help me in this regard.
1. Clean out bathroom drain with machine whilst the exhaust fan has been removed to complete the test.
2. Clean out bathroom drain with machine whilst the exhaust fan is removed to complete the test.
Thank you for your help!
Regards,
kingson
Hello kingson,
If I had to choose one of these two options, I suppose I'd go with 2 because 'whilst' and 'has been removed' don't work well together. If I were able to, I would phrase this sentence differently, something like 'After removing the exhaust fan, clean the drain with the machine to complete the test.'
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Sir, Is the below sentence grammatically correct?
Your grandmother was arrived at the airport.
Or should you be using 'had' instead of 'was' ?
Hello venkatbc,
The sentence is not correct. As you say, you could use 'had' here:
'Had arrived' is past perfect; 'was arrived' would be past simple passive. Of course, which form is correct (or whether another form such as past simple) will depend on the context and the speaker's intention.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Can I ask you a question related to the example below( cite in the book'' A university grammar of English''.)
"He telephoned the police. There had been an explosion. [1] ''
→The past perfect of the verb in one sentence and the simple past in the other fix the temporal sequence of the information conveyed in the two sentences of [1] .The past perfect forms allow the two sentences to appear in reverse sequence without any obscurity.
I feel so confused with the explanation, specifically in sentence ''The past perfect forms allow the two sentences to appear in reverse sequence without any obscurity.'' It doesn't seem to agree with the first sentence of explanation. Why?
I hope you will reply me soon, thank you so much!
Hello htnper,
The past perfect leaves no doubt as to the sequence of actions: it describes an action before another action in the past described with the past simple.
Normally, if we have two actions in successive sentences we assume that the action in the first sentence occurred before the action in the second sentence. The past perfect allows us to change the order of the sentences for dramatic effect or narrative style and still keep the chronological sequence clear.
I don't see any conflict with the explanation here; it appears consistent to me.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team