0

in English we can say,

" i was interested to hear that he has left his job "

or,

" i was interested to hear that he had left his job "

can anyone explain the difference between these two sentences..?

1

The complement clauses there:

that he had left his job

that he has left his job

refer to actions in the past, the first, to an action in the past that predated some other past event (as supplied by context), and the second, to a recent action.

The matrix clause was I was interested to hear also refers to an action in the past, the speaker's interest upon hearing the news.

The time references in the past perfect version are simple and stable.

I was interested to hear ...he had left his job.

His leaving the job is situated in time relative to the speaker's learning of that fact, absent further context. Additional context could be added to change the reference time but that wouldn't disrupt the stability:

I was interested to hear that just before he bought that boat he had left his job.

The time references in the present perfect version are a little more complicated and mobile.

I was interested to hear ... he has left his job.

In the version with the present perfect in the complement, the time frame of the utterance, the present, becomes relevant. What the speaker learned is a fact about a recent event, where recent is defined in terms of the time of the utterance, not in terms of the time of the speaker's hearing the news of the man's having left his job.

  • i don't understand , there are so many words i don't know , – Ahmed A. Zaki Sep 7 '17 at 19:02
  • In the second one, the speaker uses present perfect because he is thinking of the change-of-job as something that happened recently. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Sep 7 '17 at 20:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.