a time block in a after-clause

shorty1

Senior Member
Korean
Hello again.

I created a new thread.

#1. After I played with my dog for 2 hours, I did my homework.
#2. I played with my dog for 2 hours, and then I did my homework.


Both sound natural and are also used frequently in daily conversation?

I've never seen the case that there is a time block in after-clauses. :eek:

So, I'm curious about whether #1 is a common pattern native speakers use.



Thank you so much. :)
 
  • suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    Both of those sound fine.
    I do not know what you mean by a time block, so I cannot answer the other bit of your question.
     

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    Yes Fictional, In a written text I would prefer the gerund.
    I think there is a problem with "after" followed by the finite verb, if the time period is long. I might also use the past perfect - "After I had played with the dog for two hours, I did my homework".
     

    shorty1

    Senior Member
    Korean
    Thank you so much, suzi, Fictional and velisarius. :)

    Sorry for making you comfused.

    A time block was intended to mean 'time period' like in velisarus' post.


    If the time period in an after-clause is long, is it OK?

    For example:

    After I had lived in NewYork for 10 years, I moved to another city.
    or After I lived in NewYork for 10 years, I moved to another city.

    or 10 years is too long to make the sentence sound natural?
     
    Last edited:

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    I'm sure that if I heard them they would sound natural, but now that I think about it they don't seem quite right.
     

    shorty1

    Senior Member
    Korean
    I'm sure that if I heard them they would sound natural, but now that I think about it they don't seem quite right.
    You mean it doesn't seem quite right that a period of time itself is in a after-clause regardless of whether it is long or short?
     

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    I was hoping someone else would give their opinion on this too, but I feel it isn't quite natural to use "after" + finite verb to cover such a long time-span. I could easily say "After a lifetime of drinking and gambling he finally settled down", but I'd probably say "When I had been living in New York for ten years, I decided to move to another city."
     

    shorty1

    Senior Member
    Korean
    I was hoping someone else would give their opinion on this too, but I feel it isn't quite natural to use "after" + finite verb to cover such a long time-span. I could easily say "After a lifetime of drinking and gambling he finally settled down", but I'd probably say "When I had been living in New York for ten years, I decided to move to another city."

    Thank you so much, velisarius. :)

    I got this the wrong way.

    I get it.

    By the way:

    When I decided to move to another city, I had been living in New York for ten years.(or I had been living in New York for ten years when I decided to move to another city.)

    The above sentence would be more appropriate.

    I think probably it means the point of time I decided to move to another city was 10 years after I started to live in New York, doesn't it? :confused:
     

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    >I think probably it means the point of time I decided to move to another city was 10 years after I started to live in New York, doesn't it?

    Yes, ten years after you first hit the Big Apple you decided to move.:) Both your sentences work.
     

    shorty1

    Senior Member
    Korean
    >I think probably it means the point of time I decided to move to another city was 10 years after I started to live in New York, doesn't it?

    Yes, ten years after you first hit the Big Apple you decided to move.:) Both your sentences work.

    Thank you so much for your time and double-checking it. :)

    I get it.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top