1

I got the record this morning but I can't listen to it because it is warped. But it did not happen in the transit, it was very well packed. The pressing of the record was itself a very bad one.

I think I don't need the past perfect even if it is past of the past.

  • Past: did not happen
  • Past of the past: the pressing of the record

But I think the context makes the reader understand the meaning without using past perfect and the pressing is still very bad(the action is not completed). But I am not sure of my choice

4
  • It's quite informal English (e.g. no pronoun before "got") so using "was" is fine. It's slightly ambiguous because "pressing" can refer either to the act of making the record, or to the edition (the set of records all made at the same time), and in the latter case you'd not want past perfect.
    – Stuart F
    Commented Jul 17, 2023 at 13:27
  • I'm not sure what you mean by "the pressing is still very bad(the action is not completed)". The action of the pressing is definitely completed. I don't see any place here for the past perfect. Remember that past perfect is used to describe an event in the past before another event in the past. What are the two events in the past that you might be referring to?
    – stangdon
    Commented Jul 17, 2023 at 13:32
  • past was very well packed and the damage did not happen past of the past: the pressing of the record (the act of making the record) these are the two events I am referring to
    – Yves Lefol
    Commented Jul 17, 2023 at 15:17
  • OK. But there needs to be a relationship between the two things in the past; we don't use the past perfect every time we're talking about two events in the past, only when we're describing something further in the past from the perspective of something in the past. In this case we're not doing that, we're only talking about two events in the past from the perspective of now, so the simple past is a better choice.
    – stangdon
    Commented Jul 17, 2023 at 15:34

1 Answer 1

0

You have the record in your possession right now, and it is warped, so there's no past-of-the-past here, just simple past.

It's not important to indicate that the pressing happened before the delivery as the two aren't related. The only reason you mentioned the delivery is to say that it wasn't damaged that way. Now you're back to talking about the defect itself, which is explained by a bad pressing in the past.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .