Opinions on past-perfect?

[Britva415]

Don't you mean:


Had you danced, had you drunk, and had you screwed, because there had been nothing else to do?

I think you mean "have done"

 

[StillStunned]

This kind of discussion is probably why all the girls with a thirst for knowledge stay in Greece nowadays.

 

[Britva415]

That reminds me,

Would learning Greek for the purpose of reading 2000-year-old classics be of any use for conversation in contemporary Greece?

 

[StillStunned]

That reminds me,

Would learning Greek for the purpose of reading 2000-year-old classics be of any use for conversation in contemporary Greece?

Like I mentioned upthread, it helps to distinguish the letters. But then you might as well learn modern Greek.

Then again, the Greek I learned at school was from 2400-2700 years ago. Maybe the new-fangled 2000-year-old stuff is closer to how they speak now.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think you mean "have done"

That wouldn't be past perfect. That's present perfect.

 

[Britva415]

That wouldn't be past perfect. That's present perfect.

As long as we're niggling, I don't think it's present perfect, partly because those two words were only part of the complete construct which would have been in infitive form and necessarily subordinate to the previous verb anyway, and partly because the interrogative, which concerned the past in the first place, renders it "not real."

I'm not sure exactly what it is, I think it's more like a perfect form of a timeless, subjunctive-like mood. It can't be present perfect because it doesn't make any sense for that part of the sentence to not be in the same timeframe as the rest of it - the past.

It's not that now there might be nothing to have done, it's that at the time there might have been nothing to have done. In both cases, "to have done" is infinitive formed, which I grant I didn't include in my humorously-intentioned reply, so I can see how just latching on to the two quoted words would lead you to go "Aha! Present perfect!"

How did I do?

 

[AlinaX]

This is why I never learned grammer.

 

[XerXesXu]

As long as we're niggling, I don't think it's present perfect, partly because those two words were only part of the complete construct which would have been in infitive form and necessarily subordinate to the previous verb anyway, and partly because the interrogative, which concerned the past in the first place, renders it "not real."

I'm not sure exactly what it is, I think it's more like a perfect form of a timeless, subjunctive-like mood. It can't be present perfect because it doesn't make any sense for that part of the sentence to not be in the same timeframe as the rest of it - the past.

It's not that now there might be nothing to have done, it's that at the time there might have been nothing to have done. In both cases, "to have done" is infinitive formed, which I grant I didn't include in my humorously-intentioned reply, so I can see how just latching on to the two quoted words would lead you to go "Aha! Present perfect!"

How did I do?

I read 'to do' as an enquiry about boredom and 'to have done' as a bucket-list question, 'What else was left to tick off?'

 

[nice90sguy]

Flashbacks are a lazy device.

Tell that to Proust

 

[AlinaX]

Tell that to Proust

I will in my next flashback.