Many verb tenses such as "past perfect", "present perfect", and "future perfect" exist.
I understand what these tenses mean and when they should be used, but what does the word perfect imply? Are other tenses somehow not perfect?
Many verb tenses such as "past perfect", "present perfect", and "future perfect" exist.
I understand what these tenses mean and when they should be used, but what does the word perfect imply? Are other tenses somehow not perfect?
Perfect in this case has nothing to do with perfection. The name is an historical accident.
The Latin perfectum means complete or finished, and one of the Latin past tenses was named perfectum because it designated finished actions. Later, in the Baroque era, the earliest English grammarians were struggling to describe the language. They had no tool to hand but classical grammar*, so they borrowed the name perfect for our language's second past tense.
* Which they interpreted mostly at second hand, by way of French grammarians—and as John Lawler points out, Romance languages like French mostly retained some form of the Latin perfectum.
Past Participle, which are not always past -- the use of this construction is more like the Greek perfect system than the Latin. (There's only one past tense in English, btw. :-)
– John Lawler
Sep 07 '13 at 22:02
Aux + Participle, lined up in order. You could stop there and have English with only the present, the past, the present perfect, the past perfect, the present continuous, the past continuous, the present perfect continuous, and the past perfect continuous. Eight tenses. Except then somebody asks about the future tense. And the subjunctive tense. And the emphatic tense. And the conditional tense. And ..
– John Lawler
Sep 08 '13 at 02:28