Translate two sentences from Chinese to English, pay attention to the urgency of the tense

mary recovered after being in hospital for a long period.(past tense).

Mary gets along with the neighoures after she settled here

I'll help you analyze it with examples, and you'll know:

1) By the case of completion:

that he had finished writing this composition before 8 o'clock surprised us all.

Here it should be done when it is clear that 8 o'clock is a moment in the past, and he completed it before eight o'clock, so it is the past past, and the past should be used to become the tense;

The original sentence is: ...in such a short time: In such a short period of time, it is not a moment in the past, or it is a statement of fact, a situation, "He can do it in such a short time to surprise us", so the past perfect tense cannot be used;

2) In the case of the past tense:

because we finished our homework, we played games.

"We play the game" because "we have done our homework", which is an action that happened in the past.

The original sentence is: "There is nothing to do.""This sentence does not contain actions that happened in the past, "Nothing happened, so we played the game", "Nothing" is a fact that there is no past action, so use the present tense!

1. Pay attention to when you should use the complete tense, which is the action of the past and continues to a certain point in the past, that is to say, there are three points of ABC in the timeline from left to right, C is the present, B is the past, and C is the past of the past, so the action of C can only be used in the complete tense until this time of B. In this sentence, there is no point b at all, but it is just describing the action of finish that happened in the past, and has nothing to do with completion.

2, understand it this way: when you see because as because, it is translated according to your ideas, but here because you yourself experience, there is no causal relationship before and after, and the exact Chinese expression should be: Since there is nothing to do, we play the game.

At this time, it is the simple present tense.

The first sentence is a subject clause, i.e. (he...).time) is a separate and complete sentence as the subject, and has no precedence with the subsequent suprise.

In the second sentence, the conditional adverbial is because of the guidance, the objective facts of the statement, and the main clause does not need to be synchronized.

i think that the idea is practical.

I thought that the idea was practical

Grammar: When the main clause is in the simple past tense, the tense of the clause part should be past-in accordingly.

This sentence should be in the past tense.

i thought is the subject and predicate of the main clause, followed by the object clause. The tense of a compound sentence should be based on the main clause.

The idea is practical itself is a truth and fact sentence, so it is directly used in the simple present tense, and the tense does not need to be consistent with the previous one.

First of all .The first sentence is preceded by the past tense followed by the simple present tense.

This is a representation of what I once thought was a practical idea. The fact is that the idea has not yet been implemented.

The second sentence is consistent in tenses, indicating that I once thought the idea worked, but the fact was that the idea was implemented.

Got it?..

That is followed by a quotation, and the tense does not need to change with the previous main clause, but your subsequent sentence is also right. When you have this idea, "that idea is practical".

answer:

The emergence of any grammatical rule must not contradict the logic and objective laws of language"The Lord has passed by"It's not a rigid grammar rule.

This is because a person's past words and deeds cannot state someone's current behavior or the current state of something. What happens in the future is unknown. For example:" i found that a desk was broken "Here the clause can only be used in the past tense.

Because I couldn't have found out if the table was in good or bad condition!

that the idea is practical"This object clause is not a truth, but an aphorism and an eternal fact.

Can be a good one of the ancestors"idea"But it can be used for generations.

1)i thought that the idea is practical .

I thought it was a viable idea. (The implication is that this idea will stand the test of time).

2)i thought that the idea was practical .

I think the idea was feasible at the time (and by implication it is not feasible now).

As far as linguistic logic is concerned, there is nothing wrong with either sentence, and even the second sentence is more grammatical. But the first sentence should be what the speaker wants to say. It depends on the context!