
ivush
|
Tense problem
|
Hello colleagues,
which sentence is correct:
Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner.
or
Tom has burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner.
And why?
Thank you guys!
Ivush
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|
|

moravc
|
"Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking dinner." seems just perfect! burnt - short finished action, was cooking - long action in progress when the accident happened... If you want to use present perfect, I would say "Tom has burnt his hand." present perfect with no time reference... the sentence means: Tom �s hand is in bandage, because he had an accident. The accident happened recently, but we don´t know when exactly... The time of the accident is not so important as the result - "burnt hand"
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|

ivush
|
Thank you!
I have asked just to ensure I was right.
Because my boyfriend �s university teacher told him that the correct answer here was "have burnt".
Ivush
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|

khattouch
|
Both are correct and it depends on the situations or what we are speaking about.
If we speak about what happened to Tom last summer for example. the first sentence is correct
Tom burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner
Two actions in the past one interrupted by another: Past continuous and simple past
But if I meet Tom and I see that he has a problem with his hand then the second sentence is correct . Tom has burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner. we use present perfect to speak about a past action that has an effect or result in the present .Tom has not recovered yet . But in the first sentence he has recoverd |
30 Sep 2009
|
|

GIOVANNI
|
The second choice seems incorrect to me, I agree with Moravc. You are telling us when so I would not use the Present Perfect in saying �Tom as burnt his hand when he was cooking the dinner. I would merely say �Tom has burnt his hand �. I would also leave out �the dinner � and put only dinner. The is not necessary. |
30 Sep 2009
|
|

Tere-arg
|
Only the first one is right: we use the simple past and past continuous combined to tell an action in progress was interrupted by other.
Past continuous is used to describe the background to past actions.
You will never find present perfect and past continuous together this way.
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|

mamamima
|
to me, the second choice is inappropriate precisely because the "when.. clause " sets a specific time reference that does not apply to present perfect.
regards
mamamima |
30 Sep 2009
|
|

hafedhenglish
|
if burning hands has a result in the present such as he can �t use pens , the second choice is relevent but spekiing in general the first choice is more correct
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|

zoemorosini
|
I agree with Moravc and Giovanni.
The second form is NOT correct in any way. Sorry to your boyfriend �s prof and Khattouch.
However, a sentence using Past Perfect is OK. For example, "Tom had burnt his hand before cooking dinner." (The "he was" is optional.) In this particular sentence, you �re saying that the cooking was in the past, and the burning of his hand happened at some point prior to the action of cooking. Basically, the burnt hand had nothing to do with the cooking at all.
Great question, and good job catching the professor �s error!
--Zoe Morosini
|
30 Sep 2009
|
|

Adel A
|
The first sentence is correct as far as i know |
30 Sep 2009
|
|

abdel
|
only the first sentence is correct!
tom burnt his hand when he was cooking dinner.
"was cooking dinner" is an action that was in progress at a certain time in the past. hence, it goes that there was a reference to a past time, and so the present perfect can �t be used. we are only concerned with the BURNING and not any result whatsoever. the act of burning definitely happened in past in the middle of the cooking action. Enen though Tom is still in bandage, we will never use the present perfect!
Consider:
John: what happened to your hand Tom?
Tom: I burnt myself.
&
John: what �s wrong with your hand , Tom?
Tom: i �ve burnt myself.
ALL IN ALL THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN ASSOCIATE PAST CONTINUOUS WITH PRESENT PERFECT.
cheers . |
1 Oct 2009
|
|