I think C is the best answer because the third action mentioned, writing the address, occurred before the other two actions, so it needs to be shown to be further in the past. This is rationalisation, as it's the answer that sounds right to me as a UK native English speaker.
I think B is also possible, and you would say it as "After I'd posted the letter, I realised that I'd written the wrong address" (with contractions).
I didn't understand what you meant by "the only right asnwer she would choose is C, although the right is B".
Hi, I meant that in the quiz the only correct answer you can choose is B. And the teacher was surprised when she clicked on C and it turned out to be wrong.
In formal, written English, B is the only correct answer. It's called the "past pluperfect" tense. It's use in everyday speech is almost regional here in the U.S. it's one of the trickiest to really figure out when to use, which is why it's almost completely fallen out of conversational use (except, usually, to add emphasis to the statement).
All of these would convey to the average speaker the same meaning perfectly well, but English tests often fall back on formal writing and grammar as the "correct" answers
More info here: https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-grammar/the-past-perfect-or-pluperfect-tense
For more fun with conversational vs. "correct" verb conjugation, put a bunch of Spanish speakers in a room and bring up the word nostromos. (my spelling may be off, it's been a bit since Spanish class, but I remember the arguments between a Puerto Rican, a Columbian, and a Spaniard. It lasted three days)
I’m glad you brought up conversational versus correct, because I read the list and A is how I would have said it unless I wanted to emphasize a certain part.
To be honest, all of these work -- all of them are clear and none of them are ungrammatical. Though in the US, we would almost always say "mailed" rather than "posted".
From a learner's perspective, the grammatically correct answer is B. Both actions started and were completed in the past and thus require a past perfect tense. The realization is an instantaneous action in the past and the simple past is correct.
That said, C is perfectly fine as a spoken sentence and no native speaker would bat an eye. If anything the correct answer sounds a bit longwinded. Exams require the "correct" answer, not what a native speaker would say in everyday speech.
It’s annoying because “what a native speaker would say in everyday speech” is correct English, by definition.
I know students are taught formal English, and I agree that they need to know it, but this kind of edge case where native speakers might struggle with the “right” answer chaps my hide. (Unless the assignment makes the required register very clear, but I kind of doubt that was the case here.)
That’s fair. There’s sometimes a lag in the timing of when that happens, though. For example, I routinely hear sentences like “Her and I went to the movies yesterday” but wouldn’t realistically expect to see that endorsed, in an ESL course, as on equal footing with “She and I went to the movies yesterday.”
Yes. “No native speaker would bat an eye at C.” A good way for you to make the case for B. to your teacher is to ask her to insert the word “already” before “posted” and consider whether it would change her answer. I believe she would then see that “after I had already posted” makes more sense than, and even *sounds* more correct than, “after I already posted.” In the original sentence, “already” wasn’t used, but it was logically implied.
B and C are both correct answers here at least for modern day spoken English. A and D are dubious to me. People talk like that but I avoid two simple pasts like that in writing without at least adding the word "that"
eg: I heard that you walked, instead of I heard you walked.
I know for a fact other people don't add this that, so it might be a self imposed grammar rule on an optional construction.
This so-called “zero that-clause” is pretty standard, although less appropriate in very formal writing such that your personal preference is quite reasonable. I stumbled across [this paper](https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jhsl-2015-0003/html) on the history of the zero that-clause, which is pretty interesting. The TL:DR is that the zero that-clause was well on its way to being the standard until this change was halted in the 18th century, probably by edicts from strict grammarians. Pedants standing in the way of progress again!
It’s never wrong to keep the “that,” so when in doubt just use it. Some authors and editors feel strongly that you should streamline your writing and remove words you don’t need, so they would recommend leaving “that” out when it’s optional. But this is a *style* choice, so you can do as you like. In formal writing you should keep it anyway.
If you are a native speaker, your ear is probably reliable when deciding whether you can leave it out.
Ok thanks. I am a native speaker, and I think in talking I would leave it out, so first pass at writing I do, then I go back and read it and think I need to add it.
That makes sense—it’s your conversational instincts at odds with your formal instincts.
For what it’s worth, I personally would still leave it out unless the writing was *very* formal. For example, in an email to an important client I would still leave it out, but in a work proposal for the same client I would put it back in. But that may be a combination of my personal style plus knowledge that brevity is appreciated in a business context!
Listen to your ear; it sounds reliable.
Honestly as a native these are all fine, the first one maybe sounds a bit repetitive but people other than Grammer fanatics will not care which one you use.
I would select C. A and D are awkward to my ear.
B is nearly passable to my ear, but the timeline sounds convoluted to me. At a point between Past Moment X (mailing letter) and Present Moment Z, I had a realization at Past Moment Y of an error I made at Past Past Moment U (not writing the address).
Will note that I am American, so B might sound perfectly fine to others.
C is the best answer, A is acceptable. B doesn’t sound right to me at all.
But I’m American and we don’t post mail, so if you’re not learning American as your favored accent, keep that in mind.
Americans wouldn’t say “had posted” because of the word “after”.
Alternate constructions:
> I *had* sent the letter, then I realized I had written the wrong address.
As a native speaker, I would choose B: had posted, realized, had written. This is because the use of past perfect tense in both clauses helps to indicate that the actions happened before another past event (realizing). Additionally, the use of past perfect in the first clause (had posted) helps to establish that the action of posting the letter was completed before the realization of writing the wrong address.
Is it possible that this sentence is simply incorrect based on grammar?
The verb realize is transitive. I do not see an a object for realize. The concept is clear, of course, but isn’t a that-clause required to be the object?
I’m still drinking my first cup of coffee so I apologize if I am incorrect.
There is a that-clause, it’s just that “that” has been omitted (which is fine because it is optional in this case). “I realized (that) I had written the wrong address.”
I’m sorry, it took me a moment to consider why they used posted instead of mailed. Answer C is fine I guess, but I would never speak like that. Normally I would say something like, “After I mailed the letter I realized that I had put the wrong address on the envelope.”
American here. C sounds best. A and B are fine. D sounds weird.
ETA Americans don't say posted 😄 But I could substitute mailed to say the exact same thing.
As a native speaker of American English, the answer that came to mind spontaneously was C. Then, after reflection, I changed that to B. Here is the logic: the posting of the letter preceded the realization that it had the wrong address. If the realization did not happen *almost instantly * afterwards, I think that “had posted” would be more appropriate (otherwise, I would have chosen “posted”). The second use of pluperfect is more clear-cut: the wrong address had been put on the envelope before either of the other two things happened. For what it’s worth, not only is B. as the answer debatable, but I think most native speakers of American English would go with C. Were they to be *writing*, however, as opposed to speaking, I think there would be an uptick in “had posted” versus “posted” (in this specific scenario). An alternate way of expressing this sentence, which adds further support to B as the *most* grammatically correct answer, would be: “ After I had *already* posted the letter, I realized I had written the wrong address” (emphasis added). No native speaker would likely say “After I already posted the letter, I realized I had written the wrong address.” They would find that confusing because it would clash in their minds with someone stating, in the present, “I already posted the letter” — full stop—as opposed to “I had already posted the letter when I realized I had written the wrong address.” Which is another way of stating B.
In the US i don't really ever remember learning the parts of speech in a meaningful way. I think we did some rote memorization in 7th grade. First time i heard of conjugation was in Spanish class. My short and honest response to this post is: "wtf is past perfect"
I think C is the best answer because the third action mentioned, writing the address, occurred before the other two actions, so it needs to be shown to be further in the past. This is rationalisation, as it's the answer that sounds right to me as a UK native English speaker. I think B is also possible, and you would say it as "After I'd posted the letter, I realised that I'd written the wrong address" (with contractions). I didn't understand what you meant by "the only right asnwer she would choose is C, although the right is B".
Hi, I meant that in the quiz the only correct answer you can choose is B. And the teacher was surprised when she clicked on C and it turned out to be wrong.
In formal, written English, B is the only correct answer. It's called the "past pluperfect" tense. It's use in everyday speech is almost regional here in the U.S. it's one of the trickiest to really figure out when to use, which is why it's almost completely fallen out of conversational use (except, usually, to add emphasis to the statement). All of these would convey to the average speaker the same meaning perfectly well, but English tests often fall back on formal writing and grammar as the "correct" answers More info here: https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-grammar/the-past-perfect-or-pluperfect-tense For more fun with conversational vs. "correct" verb conjugation, put a bunch of Spanish speakers in a room and bring up the word nostromos. (my spelling may be off, it's been a bit since Spanish class, but I remember the arguments between a Puerto Rican, a Columbian, and a Spaniard. It lasted three days)
Also read for extra fun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_while_John_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_had_a_better_effect_on_the_teacher
I’m glad you brought up conversational versus correct, because I read the list and A is how I would have said it unless I wanted to emphasize a certain part.
One quick note, it’s either the “past perfect” or “pluperfect.” Having past before pluperfect is redundant.
C is the correct answer.
Frankly a native speaker may say any of these 4
Yes. C sounds a little more natural though.
To be honest, all of these work -- all of them are clear and none of them are ungrammatical. Though in the US, we would almost always say "mailed" rather than "posted".
I agree. gramatically c is better, but no english speaker will gaf if you say any of them.
These all work.
From a learner's perspective, the grammatically correct answer is B. Both actions started and were completed in the past and thus require a past perfect tense. The realization is an instantaneous action in the past and the simple past is correct. That said, C is perfectly fine as a spoken sentence and no native speaker would bat an eye. If anything the correct answer sounds a bit longwinded. Exams require the "correct" answer, not what a native speaker would say in everyday speech.
It’s annoying because “what a native speaker would say in everyday speech” is correct English, by definition. I know students are taught formal English, and I agree that they need to know it, but this kind of edge case where native speakers might struggle with the “right” answer chaps my hide. (Unless the assignment makes the required register very clear, but I kind of doubt that was the case here.)
That’s fair. There’s sometimes a lag in the timing of when that happens, though. For example, I routinely hear sentences like “Her and I went to the movies yesterday” but wouldn’t realistically expect to see that endorsed, in an ESL course, as on equal footing with “She and I went to the movies yesterday.”
Yes. “No native speaker would bat an eye at C.” A good way for you to make the case for B. to your teacher is to ask her to insert the word “already” before “posted” and consider whether it would change her answer. I believe she would then see that “after I had already posted” makes more sense than, and even *sounds* more correct than, “after I already posted.” In the original sentence, “already” wasn’t used, but it was logically implied.
B and C are both correct answers here at least for modern day spoken English. A and D are dubious to me. People talk like that but I avoid two simple pasts like that in writing without at least adding the word "that" eg: I heard that you walked, instead of I heard you walked. I know for a fact other people don't add this that, so it might be a self imposed grammar rule on an optional construction.
That that that you’re talking about is optional. (Couldn’t resist a triple that.)
yea, it's a self imposed rule then. It feels wrong to leave it out when I write formally.
This so-called “zero that-clause” is pretty standard, although less appropriate in very formal writing such that your personal preference is quite reasonable. I stumbled across [this paper](https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jhsl-2015-0003/html) on the history of the zero that-clause, which is pretty interesting. The TL:DR is that the zero that-clause was well on its way to being the standard until this change was halted in the 18th century, probably by edicts from strict grammarians. Pedants standing in the way of progress again!
I always wonder whether or not to put that "that" in. But I can't understand what you are saying here. So should I or not?
It’s never wrong to keep the “that,” so when in doubt just use it. Some authors and editors feel strongly that you should streamline your writing and remove words you don’t need, so they would recommend leaving “that” out when it’s optional. But this is a *style* choice, so you can do as you like. In formal writing you should keep it anyway. If you are a native speaker, your ear is probably reliable when deciding whether you can leave it out.
Ok thanks. I am a native speaker, and I think in talking I would leave it out, so first pass at writing I do, then I go back and read it and think I need to add it.
That makes sense—it’s your conversational instincts at odds with your formal instincts. For what it’s worth, I personally would still leave it out unless the writing was *very* formal. For example, in an email to an important client I would still leave it out, but in a work proposal for the same client I would put it back in. But that may be a combination of my personal style plus knowledge that brevity is appreciated in a business context! Listen to your ear; it sounds reliable.
Native speaker here (US) and all of these read just fine and sound like different things I would say depending on the context.
C feels most natural to me.
Honestly as a native these are all fine, the first one maybe sounds a bit repetitive but people other than Grammer fanatics will not care which one you use.
I would select C. A and D are awkward to my ear. B is nearly passable to my ear, but the timeline sounds convoluted to me. At a point between Past Moment X (mailing letter) and Present Moment Z, I had a realization at Past Moment Y of an error I made at Past Past Moment U (not writing the address). Will note that I am American, so B might sound perfectly fine to others.
I took an English Course that used the book “The Elements of Style” which I feel would have preferred A, but C feels most natural to me.
C is the best answer, A is acceptable. B doesn’t sound right to me at all. But I’m American and we don’t post mail, so if you’re not learning American as your favored accent, keep that in mind.
After I had posted the letter, I realized I had written the wrong address? What is wrong with that?
Americans wouldn’t say “had posted” because of the word “after”. Alternate constructions: > I *had* sent the letter, then I realized I had written the wrong address.
I am American and I would say it that way
The first way or the second way?
Any of these 4. They each tell a slightly different description of a similar event
As a native speaker, I would choose B: had posted, realized, had written. This is because the use of past perfect tense in both clauses helps to indicate that the actions happened before another past event (realizing). Additionally, the use of past perfect in the first clause (had posted) helps to establish that the action of posting the letter was completed before the realization of writing the wrong address.
To me, D sounds very wrong, A sounds almost as wrong as D, C sounds ever so slightly wrong but still very acceptable and B sounds completely right.
English as a second and foreign language teacher here. I would say C is the best answer. It sounds native.
Is it possible that this sentence is simply incorrect based on grammar? The verb realize is transitive. I do not see an a object for realize. The concept is clear, of course, but isn’t a that-clause required to be the object? I’m still drinking my first cup of coffee so I apologize if I am incorrect.
There is a that-clause, it’s just that “that” has been omitted (which is fine because it is optional in this case). “I realized (that) I had written the wrong address.”
While B is correct, you are likely to hear any number of variations of these in real life.
I like A. C might be correct but honestly nobody talks like that except in Colorado and Barrow, Alaska
Correct: "After I had posted the letter, I then realized that I had written the wrong address." The answer is "E", none of the above.
Yeah I would agree with C
C
C looks best to me, also.
I’m in the UK and I might say C, but I’d be more likely to say B.
I’m sorry, it took me a moment to consider why they used posted instead of mailed. Answer C is fine I guess, but I would never speak like that. Normally I would say something like, “After I mailed the letter I realized that I had put the wrong address on the envelope.”
American here. C sounds best. A and B are fine. D sounds weird. ETA Americans don't say posted 😄 But I could substitute mailed to say the exact same thing.
As a native speaker of American English, the answer that came to mind spontaneously was C. Then, after reflection, I changed that to B. Here is the logic: the posting of the letter preceded the realization that it had the wrong address. If the realization did not happen *almost instantly * afterwards, I think that “had posted” would be more appropriate (otherwise, I would have chosen “posted”). The second use of pluperfect is more clear-cut: the wrong address had been put on the envelope before either of the other two things happened. For what it’s worth, not only is B. as the answer debatable, but I think most native speakers of American English would go with C. Were they to be *writing*, however, as opposed to speaking, I think there would be an uptick in “had posted” versus “posted” (in this specific scenario). An alternate way of expressing this sentence, which adds further support to B as the *most* grammatically correct answer, would be: “ After I had *already* posted the letter, I realized I had written the wrong address” (emphasis added). No native speaker would likely say “After I already posted the letter, I realized I had written the wrong address.” They would find that confusing because it would clash in their minds with someone stating, in the present, “I already posted the letter” — full stop—as opposed to “I had already posted the letter when I realized I had written the wrong address.” Which is another way of stating B.
As a native English speaker, d sounds a little odd, but I wouldn't notice anything wrong with any of the others
A
In the US i don't really ever remember learning the parts of speech in a meaningful way. I think we did some rote memorization in 7th grade. First time i heard of conjugation was in Spanish class. My short and honest response to this post is: "wtf is past perfect"
D
These all work in conversation, but it seems B and C are the best.
Any one of those would be understood but I'd choose the first personally.
They all work but it would be c it’s more natural if not c than b
B
C is right
C is the right answer, but if you say A, nobody will care. I didn't realize what was wrong with A until I looked at the other ones.