The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

'past' Vs. 'passed' Options
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 6:30:12 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Hi Everyone!

I am confused with the two words, 'pass' and 'past'. Though, I know that 'pass' is never used as a verb. However, it's is only used as 'an Adverb', a Preposition, a noun, and adjective.


I've read somewhere the following:
Quote:
These two words are very different in their meanings and uses and it’s important to keep past vs. passed separate in your writing.

Passed is the past participle of to pass. It is used to indicate movement.

Past is a noun, adverb, adjective, and preposition. It generally has something to do with time.



My questions are as follows:
1- which one is the best? - where I mean with 'standing up' as an adjective.

I passed John whose father is/was standing up.
I passed by John whose father is/was standing up.
I walked past John whose father is/was standing up.


2- what does 'past' mean here:
Tom seemed to be looking straight past me at the wall.
My house is two past the stop sign. (if 'past' meant 'after', then why the sentence wouldn't have been written as 'My house is the second one past the stop sign.)


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
NKM
Posted: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 7:24:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/14/2015
Posts: 5,063
Neurons: 287,721
Location: Corinth, New York, United States
It's not just about time, but about space as well, in which case it essentially means "beyond".

palapaguy
Posted: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 8:58:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 1,322
Neurons: 11,606
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
A cooperator wrote:
Hi Everyone!

My house is two past the stop sign. (if 'past' meant 'after', then why the sentence wouldn't have been written as 'My house is the second one past the stop sign.)


Both of those forms are correct.

On another point,

"... why the sentence wouldn't have been written as ..."

should be

"... why wouldn't the sentence have been written as ..."

RuthP
Posted: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:11:02 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/2/2009
Posts: 5,313
Neurons: 70,451
Location: Drain, Oregon, United States
A cooperator wrote:
Hi Everyone!

I am confused with the two words, 'pass' and 'past'. Though, I know that 'pass' is never used as a verb. However, it's is only used as 'an Adverb', a Preposition, a noun, and adjective.


I've read somewhere the following:
Quote:
These two words are very different in their meanings and uses and it’s important to keep past vs. passed separate in your writing.

Passed is the past participle of to pass. It is used to indicate movement.

Past is a noun, adverb, adjective, and preposition. It generally has something to do with time.



My questions are as follows:
1- which one is the best? - where I mean with 'standing up' as an adjective.
It depends upon what you are trying to say. They all say the same thing, but they carry different connotations. Honestly, "standing up" is ambiguous: one cannot tell whether you mean the father was standing-as-opposed-to-sitting, or if you mean the father was in the process of standing up from a sitting position. I'm going to assume the father was in the process of rising, because if that is not true, if he is just standing already, then I can see no purpose for including this statement in the sentence.

I passed John whose father is/was standing up.
I passed tends to imply you and John were both traveling in the same direction. That is unlikely to be true, if he was with his father, who was just in the process of standing up. This would not be wrong, but it probably isn't the best choice.

I passed by John whose father is/was standing up.
Perhaps it implies I went by and did not stop. You might be more apt to use this if you were driving by on the road. You would be less likely to stop then than if you were walking.

I walked past John whose father is/was standing up.
Again, it implies I did not stop. It has a vaguely rude feeling, as one would likely at least slow down and say "Hi" if John and his father are friends. Walked past probably means I was physically closer and less separated from John and his father than passed by does. But, there is no definition that requires this and context could very easily reverse that.

The inclusion of the part about the father is strange. None of the potential sentences are very comfortable. None of them are wrong.


2- what does 'past' mean here:
Tom seemed to be looking straight past me at the wall.
Look at your sentences below. "Past" can mean "after", as you propose, you could also think of it as "beyond". That is what works here:
Tom seemed to be looking beyond me at the wall (that was behind me). The true import of the sentence is that Tom wasn't actually looking at me, but just gazing off into space, vaguely in my direction.


My house is two past the stop sign. (if 'past' meant 'after', then why the sentence wouldn't have been written as 'My house is the second one past the stop sign.)
You may say it the way you propose, that is fine. Native speakers will tend toward the first sentence because it is shorter.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 4:24:29 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
palapaguy wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Hi Everyone!

My house is two past the stop sign. (if 'past' meant 'after', then why the sentence wouldn't have been written as 'My house is the second one past the stop sign.)


Both of those forms are correct.

On another point,

"... why the sentence wouldn't have been written as ..."

should be

"... why wouldn't the sentence have been written as ..."




Although it is out of topic here, I didn't intend to make it as a question. So, I think my version of 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...' should be as it was written.

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 5:56:29 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
RuthP wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Hi Everyone!

I am confused with the two words, 'pass' and 'past'. Though, I know that 'pass' is never used as a verb. However, it's is only used as 'an Adverb', a Preposition, a noun, and adjective.


I've read somewhere the following:
Quote:
These two words are very different in their meanings and uses and it’s important to keep past vs. passed separate in your writing.

Passed is the past participle of to pass. It is used to indicate movement.

Past is a noun, adverb, adjective, and preposition. It generally has something to do with time.



My questions are as follows:
1- which one is the best? - where I mean with 'standing up' as an adjective.
It depends upon what you are trying to say. They all say the same thing, but they carry different connotations. Honestly, "standing up" is ambiguous: one cannot tell whether you mean the father was standing-as-opposed-to-sitting, or if you mean the father was in the process of standing up from a sitting position. I'm going to assume the father was in the process of rising, because if that is not true, if he is just standing already, then I can see no purpose for including this statement in the sentence.

I passed John whose father is/was standing up.
I passed tends to imply you and John were both traveling in the same direction. That is unlikely to be true, if he was with his father, who was just in the process of standing up. This would not be wrong, but it probably isn't the best choice.

I passed by John whose father is/was standing up.
Perhaps it implies I went by and did not stop. You might be more apt to use this if you were driving by on the road. You would be less likely to stop then than if you were walking.

I walked past John whose father is/was standing up.
Again, it implies I did not stop. It has a vaguely rude feeling, as one would likely at least slow down and say "Hi" if John and his father are friends. Walked past probably means I was physically closer and less separated from John and his father than passed by does. But, there is no definition that requires this and context could very easily reverse that.

The inclusion of the part about the father is strange. None of the potential sentences are very comfortable. None of them are wrong.


Thanks a lot, RuthP,

I think that the second one 'passed by' is the most correct one.

I am only trying to translate Arabic sentences to English.
The first one means, in Arabic, and I don't know exactly how it can be written in English, that the father(the subject) is standing-as-opposed-to-sitting('standing up' is gerund, the present participle acting as an adjective) once I passed by John. If I am going to joke, I will say that even the name of 'John' was written only by me, and it was "Zaid" in the original Arabic sentence.).
In Arabic, it is not permissible to describe/modify a "defining noun(John)" with a non-defining relative clause.
I passed by John whose father is/was already standing up.
I passed by John his father had stood up.

The one whose father is standing up came.
The one his father is standing up came.

However, it can be possible to describe/modify "a non- defining noun(a man)" with a non-defining relative clause.
I passed by a man his father had stood up.
I passed by a man his father had stood up.



Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, December 13, 2018 8:48:42 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,368
Neurons: 976,872
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
Although it is out of topic here, I didn't intend to make it as a question. So, I think my version of 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...' should be as it was written.


No, it is wrong because there is no independent clause there. You would need to say something like: "I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...".
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, December 13, 2018 8:57:31 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,368
Neurons: 976,872
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
However, it can be possible to describe/modify "a non- defining noun(a man)" with a non-defining relative clause.
I passed by a man his father had stood up.


But this is not possible in English. "His" should be changed to "whose". Alternatively, you could split it into two sentences:
"I passed by a man. His father had stood up."
A cooperator
Posted: Thursday, December 13, 2018 6:54:43 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Although it is out of topic here, I didn't intend to make it as a question. So, I think my version of 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...' should be as it was written.


No, it is wrong because there is no independent clause there. You would need to say something like: "I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...".


Thanks a lot,
You mean any clause which begins with 'Wh', then it must be a question or modified by an independent clause to be statement with 'subject-verb inversion'.

So, all these are wrong since the 'subject' precedes the verb as in 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written ...'

I have seen this statement at the TEDxRainier website:
Leslie Morgan Steiner at TEDxRainier
Why domestic violence victims don't leave


Why we cannot say so if that is.....
When you arrive at home, call me, please.
How you did this.
etc....

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Thursday, December 13, 2018 9:39:26 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,368
Neurons: 976,872
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
So, all these are wrong since the 'subject' precedes the verb as in 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written ...'

Why domestic violence victims don't leave
Why we cannot say so if that is.....
When you arrive at home, call me, please.
How you did this.etc....


The first and fourth examples are simple noun clauses, not complete sentences. They could act as the subject or object of a longer sentence, but they are not sentences in themselves. Of course, if they are made into questions by subject-verb inversion ("Why don't domestic violence victims leave?"; "How did you do this?") then they become complete sentences.

The first example can be used as a title, although it is not a complete sentence. (A title obviously does not need to be a sentence.)

The second example is a more complex noun clause, as it contains another dependent clause, i.e. "if that is...". But it still does not constitute a complete sentence.

The third example is a complete sentence, because it has an independent clause in the imperative mood, i.e. "call me, please". ("Call me, please" could be used as a complete sentence.)
RuthP
Posted: Friday, December 14, 2018 12:30:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/2/2009
Posts: 5,313
Neurons: 70,451
Location: Drain, Oregon, United States
A cooperator wrote:
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Although it is out of topic here, I didn't intend to make it as a question. So, I think my version of 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...' should be as it was written.


No, it is wrong because there is no independent clause there. You would need to say something like: "I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...".


Thanks a lot,
You mean any clause which begins with 'Wh', then it must be a question or modified by an independent clause to be statement with 'subject-verb inversion'.

So, all these are wrong since the 'subject' precedes the verb as in 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written ...'
It's not that simple. You need the entire sentence to determine whether or not a phrase is worded correctly.

I have seen this statement at the TEDxRainier website:
Leslie Morgan Steiner at TEDxRainier
Why domestic violence victims don't leave
**Why domestic violence victims don't leave their spouses? Why don't domestic violence victims leave their spouses?
**Why domestic violence victims don't leave their spouses is the biggest mystery. (Actually, it is not a mystery, but the form of this sentence is correct. See also the part on negation, below.)


Why we cannot say so if that is.....
This phrase is very bad. It is difficult to work it into something acceptable. It would be a huge help if you would provide a complete sentence, because it would probably be easier for us to tell what you are trying to do. In this partial sentencd "say so" doesn't have anything to let us know what would be said, nor does "if that is . . ." tell us anything specific, so it's very very hard to know what to say.

What is consistent between your first example and this second one is the negation. When you are negating a "why" question, the negation usually comes between "why" and the subject:
Why can't we tell the manager the front door is broken?
Why didn't you call me when you got home?
Why won't she come to the party?


When you arrive at home, call me, please.
In English, one just "arrives home" or "gets home". You may "arrive at the front door" or "get to the house". "Home" is a special case (I guess). Otherwise, this sentence is fine.

How you did this.
etc....
Again, there is not enough here for us to tell what you are trying to do. It may be you have missed the fact that "did" is a helping-verb, or an auxiliary verb in this case. Auxiliary verbs work much like negations in terms of sentence word-order:
**How did you do this?
**How did you finish the project after the computer went down?
Or, as a statement:
** How you did this is a mystery to me.

As far as I can see, there may be three areas of confusion here. (1) Negation. (2) Auxiliary verbs. (3) Differences between questions and statements.
Eoin Riedy
Posted: Saturday, December 15, 2018 8:37:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/28/2016
Posts: 195
Neurons: 1,204
Location: St. Louis, Missouri, United States
A cooperator wrote:
I passed by a man his father had stood up.


Just to make things more complicated, that sentence does make sense (although it's a bit vague without a noun to connect "his" to), it just doesn't mean what you're trying to express. "Stood up" means "failed to meet", so the sentence reads "I passed by a man his [John's?] father failed to meet." It sounds odd by itself; perhaps in some context it might make sense.
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 10:37:20 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
RuthP wrote:

2- what does 'past' mean here:
Tom seemed to be looking straight past me at the wall.
Look at your sentences below. "Past" can mean "after", as you propose, you could also think of it as "beyond". That is what works here:
Tom seemed to be looking beyond me at the wall (that was behind me). The true import of the sentence is that Tom wasn't actually looking at me, but just gazing off into space, vaguely in my direction.


My house is two past the stop sign. (if 'past' meant 'after', then why the sentence wouldn't have been written as 'My house is the second one past the stop sign.)
You may say it the way you propose, that is fine. Native speakers will tend toward the first sentence because it is shorter.
[/quote]

Thank you all of you for your helps.

I don't know what "past" means in the statement below. Does it mean "after"?
We usually say "The sun is up." to indicate that the sun has risen. It is past dawn. " The sun is out." means that the sun is shining.


Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
A cooperator
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 4:02:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
RuthP wrote:

I have seen this statement at the TEDxRainier website:
Leslie Morgan Steiner at TEDxRainier
Why domestic violence victims don't leave
**Why domestic violence victims don't leave their spouses? Why don't domestic violence victims leave their spouses?
**Why domestic violence victims don't leave their spouses is the biggest mystery. (Actually, it is not a mystery, but the form of this sentence is correct. See also the part on negation, below.)



Thank you,
But, as Audiendus said Why domestic violence victims don't leave can be used as a title, although it is not a complete sentence. (A title obviously does not need to be a sentence.). So, it is as a standalone dependent clause can be correctly used as a title although it is not a complete sentence.

I also found that this dependent clause 'The journalist who found love in UAE.' is used as title on some website.
I see it complete perfectly if it was written as follows:
The journalist who found love in the UAE died. - where 'the marked with the blue colour is an independent clause.

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Audiendus
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:47:27 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 5,368
Neurons: 976,872
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
A cooperator wrote:
I don't know what "past" means in the statement below. Does it mean "after"?
We usually say "The sun is up." to indicate that the sun has risen. It is past dawn.

Yes.
A cooperator
Posted: Monday, December 31, 2018 6:59:48 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2011
Posts: 3,145
Neurons: 11,746
Location: Ḩāḑírah, Hadramawt, Yemen
Audiendus wrote:
A cooperator wrote:
Although it is out of topic here, I didn't intend to make it as a question. So, I think my version of 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...' should be as it was written.


No, it is wrong because there is no independent clause there. You would need to say something like: "I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...".

The independent clause is the whole phrase "I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...", and the dependent clause is 'why the sentence wouldn't have been written as..."

Then, it'll be called a complex noun clause if we put it again as a dependent clause for 'if-clause' since my original sentence was:

This is the first time I know that the clause used as the 'condition-answer' in 'if-clause' must be an independent clause or a question.
If 'past' meant 'after', then I wonder why the sentence wouldn't have been written as...
If 'past' meant 'after', then why wouldn't the sentence have been written as..?

Whoever doesn't own what he promises to those who do not deserve must not promise it.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.