Present Perfect vs Simple Present in conditional clause

[toloue_man]

Hi!

Here we have two pairs of sentences, I wonder how does the first sentence of each pair differs with the other sentence in that pair?

If he makes a mistake, he will try to correct it.
If he has made a mistake, he will try to correct it.

If he finishes his work he will come to the party.
If he has finished his work he will come to the party.

I'm citing these examples from my grammar book even the punctuation is the same but I do not know why there is a "," in the first pair and there is not such punctuation mark in the second pair.

 

[Grumpy]

In each pair, the first sentence refers wholly to the future. The second sentences refer both to the immediate past ["if he has made a mistake"] and the future ["he will try to correct it].

In both pairs of sentences, it's a matter of personal taste as to whether or not a comma is necessary. The author may have decided one way when drafting the first pair, then changed his mind when drafting the second pair - and forgot to go back and amend the first pair.

 

[Rover_KE]

The commas are optional.

 

[toloue_man]

In each pair, the first sentence refers wholly to the future. The second sentences refer both to the immediate past ["if he has made a mistake"] and the future ["he will try to correct it].

In both pairs of sentences, it's a matter of personal taste as to whether or not a comma is necessary. The author may have decided one way when drafting the first pair, then changed his mind when drafting the second pair - and forgot to go back and amend the first pair.

Now that I understood almost what the difference is, let me cite another example to discuss on. Consider this sentence:

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. This sentence means that if he can finish his work early enough in the past, he goes to the party.

So what is the difference between that sentence and this one?

He will not come to the party until he has not finished his work.

I think they say much the same thing, don't they?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Now that I understood almost what the difference is, let me cite another example to discuss on. Consider this sentence:

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. This sentence means that if he can finish his work early enough in the past, he goes to the party.

So what is the difference between that sentence and this one?

He will not come to the party until he has not finished his work.

I think they say much the same thing, don't they?

The second version makes no sense. You could use "because" instead of "until".

 

[Tdol]

I'm citing these examples from my grammar book even the punctuation is the same but I do not know why there is a "," in the first pair and there is not such punctuation mark in the second pair.

It's inconsistent- I would use the commas.

 

[Weaver67]

Now that I understood almost what the difference is, let me cite another example to discuss on. Consider this sentence:

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. This sentence means that if he can finish his work early enough in the past, he goes to the party.

(neither an English teacher nor a native speaker)

Please do correct me if I am wrong but, as I see it, the whole sentence refers to the future. I don't think that it has anything to do with "finishing his work in the past". IMO, the use of the present perfect here indicates nothing more than just the completion of the process of doing his work: only after finishing his work will he be able to go to the party.

 

[toloue_man]

Now that I understood almost what the difference is, let me cite another example to discuss on. Consider this sentence:

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. This sentence means that if he can finish his work early enough in the past, he goes to the party.
QUOTE]

(neither an English teacher nor a native speaker)

Please do correct me if I am wrong but, as I see it, the whole sentence refers to the future. I don't think that it has anything to do with "finishing his work in the past". IMO, the use of the present perfect here indicates nothing more than just the completion of the process of doing his work: only after finishing his work will he be able to go to the party.

No. When present perfect is used in a dependent time or conditional clause it refers to completion of that event in past, in other words, before the verb is independent clause.

 

[5jj]

No. When present perfect is used in a dependent time or conditional clause it refers to completion of that event in past, in other words, before the verb is independent clause.

No. Weaver67 is right.

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work.

Both the coming to the party and the finishing of the work are in the future. It is true that the coming to the party will be after the finishing of the work, and so, at the time of the coming to the party, the finishing of the work will be past. However, At the time of uttering the above sentence, it is still in the future. Perhaps it will be clearer with this example:

When my wife has buried me after my death, she will dance on my grave.

I haven't died yet, and she hasn't buried me yet. These two things are future events - a long way in the future, I hope.

 

[toloue_man]

No. Weaver67 is right.

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work.

Both the coming to the party and the finishing of the work are in the future. It is true that the coming to the party will be after the finishing of the work, and so, at the time of the coming to the party, the finishing of the work will be past. However, At the time of uttering the above sentence, it is still in the future. Perhaps it will be clearer with this example:

When my wife has buried me after my death, she will dance on my grave.

I haven't died yet, and she hasn't buried me yet. These two things are future events - a long way in the future, I hope.

Are you sure? Consider this example:
He will not come to the party because he has not finished his work.

In that sentence, "he has not finished his work" must be in the past because it does not seem logical since he will not finish his work in the future, he will not come to the party.

 

[toloue_man]

5jj

So based on your point of view, I can conclude that there is no difference between these two sentences:

He will not come to the party until he finishes his work.
He will not come to the party until he has finished his work.

 

[Rover_KE]

:tick:

 

[5jj]

Are you sure? Consider this example:
He will not come to the party because he has not finished his work.

In that sentence, "he has not finished his work" must be in the past because it does not seem logical since he will not finish his work in the future, he will not come to the party.

That's a different sentence! Anyway,"'He has not finished his work" is not 'in the past'. It's a present situation at the time of speaking.

 

[toloue_man]

:tick:

What do you mean?

 

[toloue_man]

That's a different sentence! Anyway,"'He has not finished his work" is not 'in the past'. It's a present situation at the time of speaking.

I'm totally mixed up. Let me review what we have discussed so far. There two types of sentences here. One conditional and the other time clause.

Conditional: If he has finished his work, he will come to the party. The bolded part shows present tense.
Time: He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. The bolded part shows future tense.

Now consider these sentences with their present tense counterparts.

If he has finished his work, he will come to the party.
If he finishes his work, he will come to the party.

He will not come to the party until he has finished his work.
He will not come to the party until he finishes his work.

The difference between sentences of each pair is that, the first sentence in each pair emphasizes the completion of present perfect verb before the other verb. If not, so what is the difference?

 

[Rover_KE]

What do you mean?

The tick means 'correct'; they mean the same to me — as near as makes no difference.

 

[5jj]

Conditional: If he has finished his work, he will come to the party. The bolded part shows present tense.
No. It is present perfect tense. It refers to present or future time, depending on the context.
Time: He will not come to the party until he has finished his work. The bolded part shows future tense.
No, It is present perfect tense. It refers to future time

5