Fragen zum Passiv

[Maxx]

hi, könnt ihr mir die fragen beantworten?


1.The first ships taht had reached (=wieso nimmt man hier past perfect?) the colonies in America were (und hier dann simple past?gut, die handlung ist abgeschloschlossen...aber wieso nimmt man dann beim ersten nicht auch simple past?)

2. ... that they were shown favour by God and that God had given( wieso nicht simple past?) them America.

3.they were lighter and faster and could been moved (was ist das für eine zeitform? warum muss die hier genommen werden?) more easily.

4. A cure for aids hasn´t been found yet, but many illnesses have been made curable in the last 100 years.

(die zweite einsetzung verstehe ich nicht. wieso nicht simple past?)

M.

[Fortis]

Hello! I hope to help you!

1. The first action, that some chips had reached America had happend before the second action. First they reached America and then they did some other things. If you use for both actions the same time, then it would means, that both actions would have happend at the same time.

2. It´s nearly the same case. The time of the story is past. If the author wants to say, that something happend in the past before the past, he must use past perfect.

3. I think it´s past perfect passiv.

4. Because this fact, that many illnesses have been made curable, has an importance for the present not for the past. You con see it in german:

vollendete Gegenwart: "Viele Krankheiten sind schon heilbar geworden."

Vergangenheit: "Viele Krankheiten waren heilbar."

There is a significant different between them.

[Maxx]

1. The first action, that some chips had reached America had happend before the second action. First they reached America and then they did some other things. If you use for both actions the same time, then it would means, that both actions would have happend at the same time.

Aber es ist doch zur gleichen zeit, oder? Kann ich nicht sagen: The first ships that reached the colonies in America were Spanish.?

2. It´s nearly the same case. The time of the story is past. If the author wants to say, that something happend in the past before the past, he must use past perfect.

3. I think it´s past perfect passiv. und wieso nimmt man das in dem satz: They were lighter and faster and could been moved more easily?

4. Because this fact, that many illnesses have been made curable, has an importance for the present not for the past. You con see it in german:

vollendete Gegenwart: "Viele Krankheiten sind schon heilbar geworden."

Vergangenheit: "Viele Krankheiten waren heilbar."

There is a significant different between them.[/quote]