Arguing with the teacher

Mxsmanic   Wednesday, June 01, 2005, 18:13 GMT
I have not changed my position; I have reinforced it.

The best way to ensure that the greatest number of native speakers understand your speech and writing to the greatest degree possible is to speak and write the most standard version of the language you can find. Communication is all about standards, and the more precisely defined a standard is and the more carefully it is adhered to, the more accurate and efficient communication becomes. So standards are good.

However, some grammars that claim to describe standard language in fact describe some things that native speakers almost never say or write. They also sometimes make distinctions that virtually no native speakers make. Learning a grammar point is of no use if only 5% of the population understands the point well enough to profit from your use of it.

Additionally, much that is so-called "grammar" is really just usage. In the example under discussion here, both the past perfect and the past simple are gramatically correct, as long as the tense chosen corresponds to the intended meaning of the speaker. A past perfect and a past simple don't necessarily mean exactly the same thing, but as long as the speaker knows the difference and uses the difference to better communicate what he wishes to say, there is no problem. In some cases, the distinction between the two tenses may be too fine to matter in a specific context, and in that case either tense may be used, and they may be considered synonymous.