1

I am confused with the tense when I use a sentence to describe two things that have happened in the past.

The data has not been removed after she has gone.

Is that the correct tense?

The situation is that I'm supposed to remove the data after she leaves.

Improve this question
3
  • I would say "The data was not removed after she {had gone/had left.}" But you could also use simple past for both: "The data was not removed after she left."
    – Brian Hitchcock
    Commented Aug 25, 2015 at 6:44
  • How is the meanings different? If I say the data has not been removed after she is gone. Is that okay to describes something happened in the past?
    – Kam
    Commented Aug 25, 2015 at 7:12
  • I said "had gone", not "is gone". She left (in the past) and the data should have been removed after she left (also in the past, but more recent), but the data was not removed then. For all we know, it still might not have been removed—that is, it might persist to the present, not having been removed at any time in the past!
    – Brian Hitchcock
    Commented Aug 25, 2015 at 8:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1
  • The data was not removed when she left.

There doesn't seem to be any need for past-perfect in this situation. One thing happened in the past ("she left") and the other didn't happen at all.

That is, it didn't happen when it should have happened (when she left, or immediately after).

The sentence leaves open the question of whether the data might have been removed more recently. To clarify that, add one of these:

  • . . . but it has been removed now.

  • . . . but it was removed on {date}.

  • . . . and it still hasn't been removed.

Improve this answer
2
  • "The data have not been removed after she left." Is that stressing the data is still not yet removed, right now.
    – Kam
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 1:17
  • One might express that better as : The data {has/have} not been removed since she left. "Since" covers the time from when she left until now. So present perfect works with "since", but not so well with "after".
    – Brian Hitchcock
    Commented Aug 26, 2015 at 5:42

You must log in to answer this question.

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