I've come across two examples of past-perfect in the textbook and was wondering if someone could please explain why the latter sentences still use 'had' and why it shouldn't be omitted:
1) When I arrived, Jack had cleaned the room and made dinner.
OK. Subject = Jack, Actions = had cleaned the room / had made dinner. Second 'had' omitted as the subject is the same and the compound verb shares the same auxiliary.
2) They had had accidents and they had been rescued. They had been afraid and they had escaped.
?? Why is the auxiliary 'had' still in the sentences? It's the same subject 'they' and they are both using the same auxiliary? Shouldn't it be 'they had had accidents and been rescued'?
If someone could please explain it to me - I'd appreciate it. Thanks!
Answer
Both constructions, repeating had or not, are perfectly acceptable.
(1) describes fairly mundane activities in an informal manner.
(2) apparently refers to some significant, dramatic events. A more 'correct', formal style is used to emphasise the gravity of what has happened.
No comments:
Post a Comment