Rotter Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
Had died or died
The head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has died, two days after emergency surgery for a blood clot on his brain.
Lee Jong-wook, 61, was rushed to hospital in Geneva on Saturday. He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
Dr Lee, from South Korea, had worked at the WHO for 23 years and became its head in 2003.
The news came as the 192-nation body convened its annual assembly.
"I am sorry to tell you that Dr Lee Jong-wook, director-general of the WHO, died this morning," Spain's Health Minister Elena Salgado told the opening session of the assembly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it a must to say he had died in the above?
Would you write he died in the above?
I just want to know the reason for using the past perfect here.
Lee Jong-wook, 61, was rushed to hospital in Geneva on Saturday. He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
Dr Lee, from South Korea, had worked at the WHO for 23 years and became its head in 2003.
The news came as the 192-nation body convened its annual assembly.
"I am sorry to tell you that Dr Lee Jong-wook, director-general of the WHO, died this morning," Spain's Health Minister Elena Salgado told the opening session of the assembly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it a must to say he had died in the above?
Would you write he died in the above?
I just want to know the reason for using the past perfect here.
Top answer
>He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died. Both: He had been described (the previous description of his state) he had died (his passing/death) happened before the announcement. Past perfect is necessary.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0
>He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
Both:
He had been described (the previous description of his state)
he had died (his passing/death)
happened before the announcement.
Past perfect is necessary.
Both:
He had been described (the previous description of his state)
he had died (his passing/death)
happened before the announcement.
Past perfect is necessary.
00
Hi guys,
Lee Jong-wook, 61, was rushed to hospital in Geneva on Saturday. He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
Is it a must to say he had died in the above? I wouldn't say it's a must. With simple past tense, the sequence of events still seems clear.
Would you write he died in the above? Maybe yes, maybe no.
Lee Jong-wook, 61, was rushed to hospital in Geneva on Saturday. He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
Is it a must to say he had died in the above? I wouldn't say it's a must. With simple past tense, the sequence of events still seems clear.
Would you write he died in the above? Maybe yes, maybe no.
00
Thanks everybody for the reply.
Clive, your recent explanation on the past perfect tense is engraved in my memory.
It was something like the following scenario:
1. It was raining yesterday.
2. I had put the umbrella into my backpack when leaving home.
You insisted it is essential to say the first sentence.
I tried to draw a paralle
Clive, your recent explanation on the past perfect tense is engraved in my memory.
It was something like the following scenario:
1. It was raining yesterday.
2. I had put the umbrella into my backpack when leaving home.
You insisted it is essential to say the first sentence.
I tried to draw a paralle
00
«...it was announced he had died»
Isn't it simple sequence of tenses?
Furthermore: first, he died, then it was announced. In the example above we have a reverse order.
The subordinate clause («he had died») must be placed in a tense that would correctly show the time it took place relatively to the action in the main clause (announcing). Since the former happened before
Isn't it simple sequence of tenses?
Furthermore: first, he died, then it was announced. In the example above we have a reverse order.
The subordinate clause («he had died») must be placed in a tense that would correctly show the time it took place relatively to the action in the main clause (announcing). Since the former happened before
00
Hi guys,
Past Perfect is often omitted in cases where the sequence is clear. In 'The hospital announced he died', the sequence is very clear.
Best wishes, Clive
Past Perfect is often omitted in cases where the sequence is clear. In 'The hospital announced he died', the sequence is very clear.
Best wishes, Clive
00
Ok. So, my post is just a reasoning for the use of Past Perfect, though it may be omitted in the considered example.
00
Hi Ant,
Yes, that's true.
You'll find that non-native speakers often use Past Perfect in places where it could be used but where a native speaker wouldn't. I think you'll just gradually get a 'feeling' for this.
Clive
Yes, that's true.
You'll find that non-native speakers often use Past Perfect in places where it could be used but where a native speaker wouldn't. I think you'll just gradually get a 'feeling' for this.
Clive
00
Does the original example
«He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.»
sound a bit awkward to to you?
Would you change it in this way:
«He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he died.»?
«He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.»
sound a bit awkward to to you?
Would you change it in this way:
«He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he died.»?
00
He had been described as "recovering" but on Monday it was announced he had died.
No, that doesn't sound awkward at all. It simply means that he had died sometime before Monday's announcement.
I get a sense of the dying taking place after the description of recovering. With the simple past, it's possible to read it as though he had died even back when the description came out a
No, that doesn't sound awkward at all. It simply means that he had died sometime before Monday's announcement.
I get a sense of the dying taking place after the description of recovering. With the simple past, it's possible to read it as though he had died even back when the description came out a
00
«No, that doesn't sound awkward at all. It simply means that he had died sometime before Monday's announcement.»
Hmm. It's evident. Don't you think that with the Past Simple one may read it as "he" died after the announcement (quite strange)?
«I get a sense of the dying taking place after the description of recovering. With the simple past, it's possible to read it as though he
Hmm. It's evident. Don't you think that with the Past Simple one may read it as "he" died after the announcement (quite strange)?
«I get a sense of the dying taking place after the description of recovering. With the simple past, it's possible to read it as though he
0