Have questions about your preparation or an upcoming test? Need help modifying the Study Plan to meet your unique needs? No problem. Just book a Skype meeting with Brent to discuss these and any other questions you may have.
- Video Course
- Video Course Overview
- General GMAT Strategies - 7 videos (free)
- Data Sufficiency - 16 videos (free)
- Arithmetic - 38 videos
- Powers and Roots - 36 videos
- Algebra and Equation Solving - 73 videos
- Word Problems - 48 videos
- Geometry - 42 videos
- Integer Properties - 38 videos
- Statistics - 20 videos
- Counting - 27 videos
- Probability - 23 videos
- Analytical Writing Assessment - 5 videos (free)
- Reading Comprehension - 10 videos (free)
- Critical Reasoning - 38 videos
- Sentence Correction - 70 videos
- Integrated Reasoning - 17 videos
- Study Guide
- Blog
- Philosophy
- Office Hours
- Extras
- Prices
Comment on Verb Tense - Perfect Tenses
how about " After June
That would be fine, since the
That would be fine, since the order in which the events occurred is obvious (as noted at 8:00 in the video)
Amazing video. Was searching
When do we use "would have"
We use "would have" in a type
We use "would have" in a type of conditional sentence called "third conditional"
More here: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-sentence-correction/video/1179
Hi Brent,
Referring to the sentence at 06:50, is it incorrect to say "Prior to 1995, Harry visited Peru several times." ?
Yes, that's acceptable
Yes, that's acceptable because we can be certain that the visiting occurred before 1995. This idea of eliminating "had" is discussed at 7:15 in the video.
Hello Brent,
Why is it possible to say "Warren will have arrived at work before his boss gets out of bed." since the the boss gets out of bed in the future and I would suggest to use the will-future. So my suggestion is: "Waren will have arrived at work before his boss will get out of bed".
Thank you again and best
Eric
Hi Eric,
Hi Eric,
Your suggested sentence is also fine.
The sentence "Warren will have arrived at work before his boss gets out of bed" is also fine because it use the simple present tense ("gets"), which can describe a repeated or habitual action (which may or may not be happening now).
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent,
Will the fence painting example work the following way?
Fred had painted the fence red first, but Amy has painted it white ever since. (or)
Fred had painted the fence red first, but Amy has been painting it white ever since.
Both are grammatically
Since Amy's painting may continue into the present and possibly into the future, the above sentences don't meet the criteria needed to use the past perfect HAD PAINTED.
Cheers,
Brent
Hey Brent,
In the last sentence 'On May 29, Brat will have served as Mayor for 3 years' both the actions are occurring at same time i.e May 29 and 3 years of serving. So why future perfect tense?
"May 29th" and "3 years of
"May 29th" and "3 years of serving" both occur in the future. However, the event "3 years of serving" will end on May 29th.
Since the future event of "serving 3 years" will end before the future event of "May 29th", we need future perfect tense.
That is, BEFORE May 29th, we cannot yet say that Bart has served for 3 years. However, at the very moment May 29th arrives, we can say that Bart has served for 3 years. So, at the moment May 29th starts, the 3 years of service has been completed.
Does that help?
Cheers,
Brent
That helps. Thanks!
“Cranston is one of a number
Hi Brent,
Is the sentence above correct all round in grammar and structure. Are the modifiers and tenses being used correctly? Thanks!
I think the sentence is fine.
I think the sentence is fine.
I like the use of "which," because we're talking about Cranston's autographs, and "which" just tells us a little more about those autographs (they have monetary value)
Cheers,
Brent
Thanks for the lessons.
Please is it okay to say "Since 1973, Frank's diner has been providing a free soda with every burger"
That sentence is a little
That sentence is a little wordy (although not necessarily grammatically incorrect) since the word BEEN adds no value. We could just say, "Since 1973, Frank's diner HAS PROVIDED a free soda with every burger"
Please is it correct to say
Yes, that sentence is
Yes, that sentence is acceptable since "PRIOR TO 1995" clearly indicates the order of past events.
Hi Brent! With regards to the
Yes, the sentence could very
Yes, the sentence could very well have that meaning. However, if we want to use the past perfect HAD PAINTED, the other past action ("Amy painting" must be fully completed in the past).
However, in the original sentence, we have the present perfect tense "Amy HAS PAINTED," which means the action (of Sue painting) may continue into the future. In other words, Sue's painting is not necessarily an action that was COMPLETED in the past.
As such, the original sentence is incorrect.
Does that help?
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent with reference to
That sentence is perfect
That sentence is perfect OTHER THAN the inclusion of "AN important news"
It should read "John called because he wanted to share with me important news."
Cheers,
Brent
Hi, Brent.
Could you please help me to understand, why in correct option C we use Past Perfect Tense:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-late-1997-the-chambers-inside-the-pyramid-of-the-pharaoh-menkaure-85840.html
Question link: https:/
Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-late-1997-the-chambers-inside-the-pyramid-...
The sentence tells us that two events occurred in the past.
1) The chambers were closed
2) Moisture (from people breathing) raised the humidity.
Since past event #2 occurred BEFORE past event #1, we need to express event #2 in the past perfect tense.
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent,
At 02:52, I´m wondering whether ¨Jill has been working at Pizza World for eight years¨ meaning the same, is this also correct?
Thanks x
1) Jill HAS BEEN WORKING at
1) Jill HAS BEEN WORKING at Pizza World for eight years
and
2) Jill HAS WORKED at Pizza World for eight years
Both have the same meaning, except sentence 2 is more concise.
Hi Brent,
Could you please explain why D is better than A,
Government officials announced that restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river resulted from the intermittent showers that had fallen throughout the area the day before.
(A) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciative increase in the level of the river
(B) restricting the use of water would continue because there had not been any appreciative increase in the river's level that
(C) the use of water would continue to be restricted because not any appreciable increase in the river's level had
(D) restrictions on the use of water would continue because no appreciable increase in the level of the river had
(E) using water would continue being restricted because not any appreciable increase in the level of the river
Thank you in advance,
Question link: https:/
Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/government-officials-announced-that-restricti...
This comes down to correct word choice (e.g., LAY vs LIE, AFFECT vs EFFECT, etc.)
Answer choice A is incorrect because APPRECIATIVE means "feeling or showing gratitude or pleasure."
Since river levels cannot be appreciative, answer choice A is incorrect.
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent,
Thank you,
I understand,
Why "had eaten" and not "had
It all comes down to
It all comes down to participles.
When we use the past perfect tense, we write "HAD + PAST PARTICIPLE"
In most cases, we simply add ED to the verb.
So, for example, JUMPED is the past participle of JUMP.
However, some verbs (known as irregular verbs) do not follow this construction.
For example, the past participle of BUY is BOUGHT, and the past participle of EAT is EATEN.
I cover irregular verbs in the following video, starting at 2:45: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-sentence-correction/video/1157
Also, here's a list of some common irregular verbs and their past participles: https://languageonschools.com/blog/english-irregular-verbs-list/
Cheers,
Brent
Hi Brent,
As pointed, usage of the past perfect tense is optional/redundant if the chronology of the events is obvious. Can we stretch the rule for future perfect tenses as well?
Like in the example of Dirk's parents saving money, can we use 'will save' instead of 'will have saved' since the action of saving will be taking place before the action of Dirk's graduation, according to the context?
Thanks in advance.
Great question!!
Great question!!
I'm pretty sure the GMAT test-makers won't allow that. I certainly can't think of any questions in which that has been allowed.
Hi Brent,
I have a doubt in the following question:
Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside São Paulo, Brazil, their descendants, popularly known as killer bees, had migrated as far north as southern Texas.
A) Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside São Paulo, Brazil,
B) In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside São Paulo, Brazil,
C) In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside São Paulo, Brazil,
D) It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside São Paulo, Brazil, when
E) It took less than the 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside São Paulo, Brazil, and then
The answer is A. Though it seems to be the best option, but shouldn't we use simple past tense (migrated) instead of past perfect tense(had migrated) since this event is new on the timeline as compared to event of the release of African Honeybees?
Thanks in advance.
Tricky question!
Tricky question!
To better understand the time frames, let's first recognize that there is some time in the PAST at which point fewer than 35 years had elapsed since the release of the African honeybees. Let's even give that event a date. Let's say that, on July 1st, 2012, fewer than 35 years had elapsed since the release of the African honeybees.
So, July 1st, 2012 is a past event that is now completed.
BEFORE this past event (July 1, 2012), another past event was completed. That is, the bees MIGRATED before the past event of July 1, 2012.
Since the MIGRATING happened BEFORE another past event, we need the past perfect tense HAD MIGRATED.
Does that help?
Yes, now I understand.
Thanks, Brent!
Hi Brent,
Can you please help me this question?
https://gmatclub.com/forum/dressed-as-a-man-and-using-the-name-robert-shurtleff-deborah-sampson-37264.html
I am not able to understand why have we used past perfect tense in the answer? Is it because she became ill and hence we had to let her go?
Thanks in advance.
Question link: https:/
Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/dressed-as-a-man-and-using-the-name-robert-sh...
A) Dressed as a man and using the name Robert Shurtleff, Deborah Sampson, the first woman to draw a soldier's pension, joined the Continental Army in 1782 at the age of 22, was injured three times, and was DISCHARGED in 1783 because she HAD BECOME too ill to serve.
Deborah was DISCHARGED in 1783. So this event was completed in the past.
BEFORE the discharge, Deborah became ill.
So, BECOMING ILL is an event that occurred BEFORE the past event of being DISCHARGED.
As such, we need the past perfect HAD BECOME
Does that help?
Hi Brent,
Could you please help explain how can we arrive at the answer in this question? The tenses are confusing me. Thank you!
https://gmatclub.com/forum/at-the-end-of-2001-motion-picture-industry-representatives-said-that-220348.html
Here's my full solution:
Here's my full solution: https://gmatclub.com/forum/at-the-end-of-2001-motion-picture-industry-re...
Cheers,
Brent
Thank you!
Hey Brent,
I need your help with the following question...
https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-first-detailed-study-of-magpie-attacks-in-australia-indicates-that-77464.html
So, here:
1. shouldn't there be 'indicated' if we are using 'reached'?
Why are we using 'reached' instead of 'reach' with 'indicates'?
Even when I remove the fluff, it sounds odd saying 'The study INDICATES that by the time they REACHED adulthood'.
2. I got confused about whether 'they' in 'by the time THEY reached adulthood' is referring to 'magpie' or 'men and women'. And decided to go with 'THEY referring back to magpie' which turns out to be wrong. So, how to avoid committing these kinds of mistakes considering the time constraint during the actual exam - which I have scheduled for the coming 18th of November...
Question link: https:/
Question link: https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-first-detailed-study-of-magpie-attacks-in...
1. The study is a document that exists in the present. So, it makes sense to say that the study (presently) INDICATES something.
What does it indicate?
It indicates a relationship between 2 things that occurred in the past:
- People REACHED adulthood
- Magpies ATTACKED people
Since both event occurred in the past, we must use past tense: REACHED and ATTACKED.
Moreover, since the ATTACKING occurred before the REACHING, we need to use the past perfect tense HAD ATTACKED (more here on past perfect tense: https://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-sentence-correction/video/1178
2. When we first see THEY, it's unclear what THEY refers to (MAGPIES or PEOPLE).
However, the second part of the same sentence tells us that THEY = 98 percent of men and 75 percent of women
So, it's clear (at least in the eyes of the test-makers :-) that THEY isn't referring to the MAGPIES.
Thank you for the explanation