KyleWiddison wrote:
Well this is a fun one
The past perfect is used to show the EARLIER of two past events. This one is a bit tricky because the use of the word 'before', which essentially provides the same function as the past perfect.
It appears that the 'had had' may be overkill with the inclusion of 'before', but let's look closely at the difference in meaning between one and two 'hads':
1) Tim had several passenger cars before he decided to buy a sports car.
2) Tim had had several passenger cars before he decided to buy a sports car.
In the first sentence, we get the sense that at the time Tim bought his sports car he was in possession of several passenger cars. In the second sentence, we have a slightly different impression - Tim had owned several passenger cars (but was done owning them) by the time he bought the sports car.
So, even with 'before' in the sentence, we can see that the past perfect is helpful to show that the prior action was over by the time the later action takes place.
KW
Hi Kyle, Thank you for your valuable comments.
Please refer to the following 2 reconstructions the first sentence -- here I replaced "had" with "in possession with":
a)
Tim was in possession of several passenger cars before he decided to buy a sports car. This sentence makes clear that the possession was before the decision was made. This sentence would mean the same as the following two sentences.
-- i) Tim had had several passenger cars while he decided to buy a sports car.
-- ii) Tim had several passenger cars before he decided to buy a sports car.
b)
Tim was in possession of several passenger cars while he decided to buy a sports car. This sentence does not make clear that the possession was before the decision was made.
I am not sure if there is anything wrong in my understanding.