Skip to main content

word choice - "I have received" vs. "I received"


The option of using simple past vs. present perfect in situations like the following has been bothering me for quite some time.



I sent you a letter a few days ago; I was wondering if you have received it.


I sent you a letter a few days ago; I was wondering if you received it.



People use both of them, in most cases I would say interchangeably. I also searched it on google books, which turned out to be used in roughly the same way. I was wondering if someone could shed some light on what the difference between the two was? Which one is used more often and seems more appropriate over the other?



Answer



To a first approximation both OP's sentences are valid - certainly they both mean exactly the same. But if I'm going to get "picky", I don't much like the first one...



?I sent you a letter a few days ago, I was wondering if you have received it.



...because there's a subtle clash of tense. "I was wondering" refers to my wondering in the past, but "if you have received it" asks about your status (of having received it or not) in the present.



Thus my own preferred version is neither of OP's...



I sent you a letter a few days ago; I was wondering if you had received it.



...but to be honest, I'm only proposing that for the sake of grammar. If I needed to convey the sentiment myself I'd just ask "Have you received the letter I sent a few days ago?". It seems to me the additional verbiage is just pointless circumlocution.



Regarding the "mixed tense" issue, note that "I was wondering if you had" is twice as common as "I was wondering if you have". A preference which is even more noticeable when comparing, say, "...if you knew" with "...if you know".


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more