1. Say something! What did I eat? Answer: Apples Since there is no preposition between the verb « eaten » and « apples », we call « apples » the OBJECT DIRECT because it comes directly after the verb. 2. Disagree with the use of just causal construction: However, if in these cases the direct object is in front of the verb, then the past tense of the participle coincides with this direct object: I saw a mouse in the street last night (I saw a mouse in the street last night). Here, vu assumes no correspondence with the subject of the sentence and remains seen, regardless of the gender of the speaker. Note that none of the verbs in this category (with the exception of hatching > hatching) have past participles that end in a consonant. In other words, the « correspondence » of these verbs basically applies only to the written language. The rule is as follows: if the direct object precedes the verb to have, there is a correspondence with that direct object. However, if the direct object precedes the past section, the past participation actually corresponds to that direct object.
So, for example: [Who/what is washed? –> « hands. » « Hands » is the direct object and is defined after the verb, no match.] But the verbs to have need agreement in a very specific construction: the past participle must correspond to the direct object if it precedes the verb. Have you seen Romain`s new bike? He bought it here. [« Romain`s new motorcycle » is the direct object; in the first movement, it is not a correspondence after the verb; in the second movement, the personal pronoun « the » is the direct object and replaces « Roman`s new motorcycle »; the past participle « bought » therefore agrees with this.] This rule of agreement with past participles that use have is quite tricky, but it is important to know it in order to be grammatically completely correct (especially when writing, because most of the time you would not hear any difference when you speak!). Leave me a comment below with questions or examples of how to use the past participatory agreement. If there is a direct object that is the recipient of the action, then the rules of correspondence are the same as in have: the past participle corresponds to the direct object when it is in front of the verb and disagrees when placed after it. In the previous section, we found that past participation coincides with the theme of reflexive verbs. But in fact, we could say that it coincides with the direct object, since the whole point of a reflexive verb is that the subject and the object are essentially « the same ». So in a case like: In these cases, the reflexive pronoun is not the direct object.
In the first sentence, what is prepared is pasta; in the second case, the thing that breaks is the leg. And in these cases, there is no agreement on the past of the participle. The rule is: If the direct object is after the verb « to have »: no match! So we write « eaten » (no s at the end) You saw this big mouse? I saw her on the street last night! In this example, the past participation does not coincide with the subject of the sentence, but with the direct object, since the direct object precedes the past participation. Since the noun mouse is feminine, it is grammatically correct to add an « e » to the end of the view to make it visible. In such cases, you need to pay attention to which pronoun is the direct object pronoun: that is, which pronoun means « the thing that is bought », etc. This rule applies only to direct objects and not to other types of pronouns such as indirect object pronouns (him/their) and adverbial pronouns (y/en). For example, if you want to say, « I left at nine o`clock, » you would say, « I left at 9 a.m. » Whether or not you add the last « e » depends on whether the person speaking is a man or a woman. But past participles that follow the verb to be must show agreement with the pronoun. So when you`re talking about a group of people, you should put the participle in the plural; for example, « We went to get ice » in French: « We went to get ice ». There are cases of reflexive verbs where the reflexive pronoun actually represents an indirect object, usually with the meaning of « to myself », to oneself », « to oneself », etc.
For example: In reality, however, speakers don`t tend to add chords with having in everyday language. Only if they speak carefully and think about the written language do they make these agreements when they speak. So if they don`t read from a script, people would usually say: If you want a very complete Compound Past quiz with being and having as auxiliary verbs with and without agreement, try this one. This is not a quiz for beginners. It is a compound verb form composed of a conjugated auxiliary word (to be or to have) and the past partizip of the verb. [Who/what is washed? » > « They. » So the subject is the receiver of action, there is unity.] Usually, we learn that past participles that use the verb to have do NOT have to agree. For example, if a woman says « I spoke with him, » you should NOT put an extra « e » (refers to the speaker) at the end of the conversation. Today we are going to look at the verbs to have and to be – the most common verbs in English that are used to form the simple past tense.
As you know, different verbs in the past tense take precedence over having or being. While most past participles take the verb to have, there are very common verbs that take to be. .