Friday 23 January 2015

SC # 1

There is a difference in using 'did not' and 'have not'.

Let me give you a few examples and then try to explain the usage

did not :

Case 1

  • I did not have time - no time at all
  • I did not have lunch - it just means the speaker did not have lunch

Case 2

  • I did not see joe - it means the speaker did not see
  • I did not go to Paris - I guess you get the meaning

have not :

Case 1

  • I have not had time - no time till now, but may have some time later on
  • I have not had lunch - means the speaker has never had lunch or he may have lunch later

Case2

  • I have not seen joe - can mean the speaker has not seen joe around or has never seen joe
  • I have not been to Paris - the speaker has not visited paris till now

Those were general examples under similar contexts.

Lets try using 'did not' and 'have not' in the same sentence (there may be grammatical errors if I do this) just for explanation sake.

  • I did not play the game yesterday - did not
  • I have not play the game yesterday - sounds strange; trust me it is wrong
  • I have not played the game before - right usage; before - is the timeline here and before includes the speakers entire past

Similarly

  • He did not bring his ID card today. - correct usage
  • He has not brought his ID card today - wrong usage
  • He has not brought his ID card - acceptable; but it is upto the manager to decide if it is today or forever

I guess the above examples illustrate how the meaning can change depending on the usage of 'did not' and 'have not'.

Something I want you to notice in those sentences is the time frame/period, when ever you tend to use 'did not' it is used in sentences where there is a clear indication to the time of event like today, yesterday or the present like now.

You can always do some more research over the internet for more clarifications.

Please Note : have and has , both can be used to show possession, 'have' works in the first and second person while 'has' works in the third person, so the grammar explained using 'have' can be applied to 'has' as well.


No comments:

Post a Comment