• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

→ I am accustomed to boozing java every daylight. I had turn accustomed to drinking burnt umber every twenty-four hour period. This describes how your personify handled drunkenness deep brown every twenty-four hours. The significant could be "I used to drink coffee every day and I was accustomed to it, so it didn't make me feel agitated. But if I did that now, I would never sleep at night. In the case of "two-clock time nominee", that refers to a status the person has now, no matter how you look at it. The two times may both be long ago, maybe she was nominated in 1962 and in 1973. But she still has the status of having been nominated two times. Still, once the event is past, we usually phrase it in the past tense. We don't say, "George I Washington is the outset chair of the Conjunct States", because he isn't president any more. We say "George IV Washington D. ebony porn C. WAS the inaugural President."
I'd use the PP to describe an action when the time is not important and an action incomplete , unlike Simple Past to describe when something happened and an action completed. English is my second language and I always have this tenses questions on how to use present or past tense in the same sentence. The second one out of all sounds most natural. This just recounts what you drank and how often you drank it, and implies that this was in the past and you don't do it any more.
You use "was" (past tense) for the events that occurred at a known time in the past and ended in the past. All of these sentences are grammatically correct and can sound natural; the difference is in what is emphasized. In casual conversation, I'd probably be most likely to say sentence (2). → I was accustomed to drinking coffee every day.
It joins the subject to noun or adjective that describes or identifies the subject. All properties were sold on 25th May, 2011. They consisted of a .25-acre lot with a 2-bedroom house and an adjacent .25-acre lot, at that time undeveloped. The proceeds were used to pay off the estate taxes. Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search. Since a marriage is a status and it occurs once (each marriage), but the status is continuous until both people get separated or divorced, I'm confused, whether I should say the sentence 1. For example the verb "seem" can link a subject to an adjective. Think of present perfect as describing the present result of an action that is perfect (completed). It is useful to connect a past event to the present time. They consist of a .25-acre lot with a 2-bedroom house and an adjacent .25-acre lot where the new owners are now putting in an elaborate garden.
Notice how the verb changed in that last sentence! Because once a car is made by Benz, it will always be a Benz, no matter when it was made (although, in the U.S., we typically say Mercedes). However, in some context, the meaning could be slightly different and you can visit the following links to learn more about how it works. You will notice many people have different views on this issue. The most important thing is you understand when it is used and what it means.
The problem with your use of "let been" is the event is not continuing from the past so better usage would be simple past, "was". Both sentences refer to a task taking place only in the past. But then again, both refer to an event, not a thing, so technically should be past perfect. You use "suffer been" (present perfect tense) for the events that occurred in an undefined time in the past and they or may not still last. You are right that "be" is a special verb in English. When it is the main verb in a sentence is nearly always used as a linking verb.
He was a graduate the day they gave him his diploma, and he will remain a graduate the rest of his life. Sometime I am confused with when to use is and when to use was.
In your sentence, if the speaker had literally just finished working when the phone rang, either would be acceptable. There's no particular connection between the usage of these words, despite their apparent similarity. The phrase "be victimized to" is an entirely different animal. Yes, they both refer to a past habit, but the meanings are different. It reminds me of the time a politician came to speak at my high school, and the principal introduced him as "a erstwhile alum of Northport High pressure School". When he got up to speak he said, "I thought process I smooth was a grad." For of course he was.
This usage of "put-upon to" means that something existed or repeatedly happened in the past but does not exist or happen now. All the above sentences suggest you want to be something you are factually not. In other words, you are NOT young, a boy, a policeman, a rich man and you are sorry that you are not young, a boy, a policeman, a rich man. As I am doing my 2nd homework task for 8th grade English, I got frustrated by trying to remember the parts of speech for a few words. If it's more of a brief description of one major detail in the study (i.e. just that one sentence you described), then you could use "had been". If you are explaining details about the study and how it was conducted, then I would stick to "was". "Was" is usually used to describe something that happened in the past and has ended, and "had been" is for something that had taken place and went on for a period of time. I found this sentence on Wikipedia and the author used the Simple Past. I'd use Present Perfect but it always confused me.
You would use We have been married for [X time] if the marriage is still in effect. The statement is accurate as of the current date, but there is an understanding that as time goes on the duration of the marriage will likewise increase. You would use We were married for [X time] if the marriage has ended, for example you are now divorced, or your spouse has died. You are saying that the duration of the marriage is fixed, and will not change. But you are not required to use the present. You do so only if your topic, the matter you are talking about, involves the current status of the properties. If on the other hand your topic is the status at the time of the sale or the transaction itself, you use the past. All properties were sold on 25th May, 2011, the selling price is $500,000.00.