In my recent English examination, I read this sentence:
His time spending in the countryside for him writing is enjoyable .
But my teacher said that it was wrong and the answer is :
His time spent in the countryside for him to write is enjoyable.
Would you clearly explain this to me?
Remember that in English, the past participle doubles as a passive participle. So here, "spent" is being used as a past participle. We could rewrite the sentence slightly like this (unnatural, but illustrates the meaning):
His time that is spent in the countryside for him is enjoyable.
"Time" is the object of "spend", so we need the passive participle, hence we need "spent". Readers will not understand this to be past tense unless context indicates it (e.g. if you had written "was enjoyable").
Spending and writing are both present tense words - often distinguishable by how they end in -ing.
Since it appears that the sentence is supposed to be in the past, then he is no longer spending time in the countryside, he has spent time in the countryside.
Also, it should be 'for him to write' because writing implies he has doing the action at the current time.
