1

He left all he had to found an open entrance scholarship to the school

VS

He had left all to found an open entrance scholarship to the school.

  1. what is the difference between these sentences? also,
  2. after to we should use present form of verb(find) but here writer used past form of verb(found)....why?

2 Answers 2

2

These two sentences have similar meanings:

He left all he had to found an open entrance scholarship to the school.
He had left all to found an open entrance scholarship to the school.

Here "left" is used in the sense of "to bequeath," to pass on belongings or wealth after death. The word "found" here is not the past tense of "to find," but rather the infinitive of a different verb, "to found:"

to set up or establish on a firm basis or for enduring existence

1

There is structural difference between those two sentences. The first sentence is in past tense.whereas the second one is in past perfect tense.

When it comes to the meaning, the second one is generally used to indicate that the subject left all his friends and peers.In that sentence, all refers to people.

While in the first sentence, he might mean that the subject of the sentence left all his possessions i.e objects.

But, one may interchange the meanings according to one's wish.

I think there is no need to answer your second question, as it is already mentioned in previous answer to this question by P.E.Dant

1
  • Why would someone be forced to abandon "all his friends and peers" to establish a scholarship? This makes no sense, @Krishna Vamsi Vedula. In both sentences, the action is clearly bequeathing all - i.e., all the speaker's wealth, and this is how it would be understood by a native speaker. To take the meaning "abandoned all his friends and peers" would require a great deal of complicated context. Jul 18, 2016 at 6:37

You must log in to answer this question.

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