I saw that this sentence was not correct:

I have registered for 4 classes after I met with my counselor.

but this one was:

I have registered for 4 classes after meeting with my counselor.

'met' and 'meeting' are both in the past so what is the difference? Both are single events (registered and met). Does met reject the action in a further past than gerund?

  • 'Meeting' isn't in the past. It is present continuous. – Varun Nair Dec 23 '15 at 8:37
  • Who told you that sentence 1 is not correct? – CowperKettle Dec 23 '15 at 9:07
  • look at this question Which tense is the right one in this particular example?answered by tromano not ok I have registered for four classes after I met with my advisor. – user5577 Dec 23 '15 at 9:37
  • After I met my counselor, after I had met my counselor, after meeting my counselor, and having met my couselor are all correct grammatically. – Khan Dec 23 '15 at 10:11
  • 2
    @Khan. The full sentence in the prior question has aspectual problems. The present-perfect conjunction with the past doesn't fly. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Dec 23 '15 at 14:28

The time reference in a present-perfect construction must not exclude the present.

Can I offer you some breakfast?
--No thanks, I have already eaten breakfast. OK
--No thanks, I have eaten breakfast yesterday. not OK

After I met excludes the present moment. It is not like date math, where (today is after 1/1/2000) = true. In natural language (English), "after I met" refers to some time in the past subsequent to the time of the meeting.

After meeting does not exclude the present.


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.