Stupid sentence question

sneakers145 · Oct 6, 2007

But they weren't there. They...

A) They didn't see what she saw.

B) They didn't see what she'd seen.

C) They didn't see what she had.

D) They hadn't seen what she had.

My head is spinning!

Prawn · Oct 6, 2007

didn't see what she did.
or
hadn't seen what she had.

glassquill · Oct 6, 2007

Option A sounds better to me. At least that's what I think when I read the whole thing out loud. Just my opinion.

FennelGiraffe · Oct 6, 2007

When a story is written in past tense, events that occurred in the story past require past perfect tense. If I correctly understand what you want to say, I would make it:

"But they hadn't been there. They hadn't seen what she had."

sneakers145 · Oct 6, 2007

I think you're right, Fennel.

The context is:

Charlie didn’t care what her colleagues thought. Yeah, they had to pick up the slack in a place so busy there was no time to pee. But they weren’t there. They didn’t see what she saw. (the original)

or is it better:

Charlie didn’t care what her colleagues thought. Yeah, they had to pick up the slack in a place so busy there was no time to pee. But they hadn't been there. They hadn't seen what she had.

maestrowork · Oct 6, 2007

They hadn't seen what she had -- the event happened before the current time.

PeeDee · Oct 6, 2007

What a stupid sentence question. We're all going to laugh now.

Fennel and Ray are right, far as I'm concerned.

sneakers145 · Oct 6, 2007

PeeDee said:
What a stupid sentence question. We're all going to laugh now.

Fennel and Ray are right, far as I'm concerned.

Laugh away.

Sometimes words just make no sense. Either that or I've been staring at the screen too long. :e2hammer:

burgy61 · Oct 6, 2007

PeeDee said:
What a stupid sentence question. We're all going to laugh now.

Fennel and Ray are right, far as I'm concerned.

The only stupid question is the one that doesn't get asked, IMO.

I would agree that Fennel and Ray are right.

JoNightshade · Oct 6, 2007

Regarding this issue, does anyone ever notice how sometimes with contemporary authors, in a long section of past perfect they will just start out with it and then switch back to regular past tense once it's established in the past? It kind of annoys me and yet at the same time in my own writing sometimes I get tired of all those "hads."

So is this okay to do or is it incorrect?

Sunkissed27f · Oct 6, 2007

They hadn't seen what she had seen.

Do you end a sentence in had?

It would be past perfect tense:
Past perfect tense describes an action that took place in the past before another past action. This tense is formed by using had with the past participle of the verb.

But what do I know?

FennelGiraffe · Oct 6, 2007

JoNightshade said:
Regarding this issue, does anyone ever notice how sometimes with contemporary authors, in a long section of past perfect they will just start out with it and then switch back to regular past tense once it's established in the past? It kind of annoys me and yet at the same time in my own writing sometimes I get tired of all those "hads."

So is this okay to do or is it incorrect?

I think that's a common way of handling long flashbacks. The past perfect signals the time shift initially. But, as you say, the "hads" read awkwardly when they go on for more than a few sentences. Once the time is firmly established it's acceptable to slip quietly back into simple past.

J. R. Tomlin · Oct 6, 2007

JoNightshade said:
Regarding this issue, does anyone ever notice how sometimes with contemporary authors, in a long section of past perfect they will just start out with it and then switch back to regular past tense once it's established in the past? It kind of annoys me and yet at the same time in my own writing sometimes I get tired of all those "hads."

So is this okay to do or is it incorrect?

It is considered a legitimate way to set up a flashback situation. You can use past perfect for a while to signal a change to the flashback then switch to plain past, since then the reader knows what you're doing. It isn't so much a matter of getting "tired" of hads as that you don't want to continue emphasizing that this is something that has already happened and thus has no tension.

FennelGiraffe · Oct 6, 2007

Sunkissed27f said:
Do you end a sentence in had?

The final "seen" is implied because it's the same verb used earlier and the sentence is structured as a comparison[1]. I think it's correct either with or without it. Including it sounds a little more formal to me, omitting it a little more colloquial -- a stylistic choice. Also, you would include it if there were any possibility of ambiguity, which doesn't apply in this case.

[1]I'm not sure "comparison" is the right term for this, but whatever it's properly called, the structure of the sentence indicates the same verb is used in both clauses.

ETA: I think I'm wrong about it being a comparison. You could just as well say "They hadn't seen what she had done." Or "They hadn't seen what she had eaten." In cases like that, you can't just end with "had". The verb is different, so you have to specify it. The reason "seen" can be omitted in the original question is because it's the same verb.

Prawn · Oct 6, 2007

And let me add that there is an Absolute Write forum for grammar questions where lots of folks who know lots answer lots of questions at.

(couldn't resist the preposition)

PeeDee · Oct 6, 2007

Prawn said:
And let me add that there is an Absolute Write forum for grammar questions where lots of folks who know lots answer lots of questions at.

(couldn't resist the preposition)

You...you monster!

maestrowork · Oct 6, 2007

JoNightshade said:
Regarding this issue, does anyone ever notice how sometimes with contemporary authors, in a long section of past perfect they will just start out with it and then switch back to regular past tense once it's established in the past? It kind of annoys me and yet at the same time in my own writing sometimes I get tired of all those "hads."

It's actually the preferred way (for me, anyway). All those "had"s would give me headaches. Once you established the time frame, it's perfectly fine to use past tense, and then you can transition back to the "actual time frame."

wayndom · Oct 6, 2007

"They didn't see the sea-shells on the see-saw that she saw."

David I · Oct 6, 2007

Usually a big sign that you aren't even writing the right kind of sentence for your purpose. Or that you need more than one sentence, or maybe--since it sounds like close third, even some sentence frags.

Stupid sentence question

sneakers145

Prawn

Writing is finite,revising infinite

glassquill

RB's favourite chewtoy

FennelGiraffe

It's green they say

sneakers145

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

PeeDee

Where's my tea, please...?

sneakers145

burgy61

JoNightshade

has finally arrived

Sunkissed27f

FennelGiraffe

It's green they say

J. R. Tomlin

FennelGiraffe

It's green they say

Prawn

Writing is finite,revising infinite

PeeDee

Where's my tea, please...?

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

wayndom

David I