Verb agreement question

[Rohatgi83]

I am unclear about the correctness of the following sentence

"He has frequently defaced public property and went to jail.".
As suggested instead os using went the book suggested to use gone . Which I agree. But I do not seem to understand the use of has. I think has must be changed from has to had. Can some one help me?

So the final answer should be
He had frequently defaced public property and gone to jail.

Thanks

[Willy]

I am unclear about the correctness of the following sentence

"He has frequently defaced public property and went to jail.".
As suggested instead os using went the book suggested to use gone . Which I agree. But I do not seem to understand the use of has. I think has must be changed from has to had. Can some one help me?

So the final answer should be
He had frequently defaced public property and gone to jail.

Thanks

HAS is correct here. Why do you think HAS should be changed to HAD?

past perfect tense used when two actions took place in different time period in past. I don't think there are two actions taking place in past.

another hint, look at the usage of "frequently" -- implies he may still be doing the same things, so HAS.

[Rohatgi83]

Hi Willy,

I thought of using had instead of has as I looked at the verb went in the remaining sentence and think of the problem as verb agreement.

Thanks for your reply.

[Willy]

Hi Willy,

I thought of using had instead of has as I looked at the verb went in the remaining sentence and think of the problem as verb agreement.

Thanks for your reply.

WENT is wrong in this sentence no matter you use HAS or HAD. Both goes with GONE.

[tim]

thanks Willy..

[Willy]

thanks Willy..

:-)

[vivs.gupta]

He had frequently defaced public property and went to jail."

just want to understand why 'went' is wrong here? He went to jail is an event and before that he defaced public property so we can use had to represent an earlier action.

[Willy]

He had frequently defaced public property and went to jail."

just want to understand why 'went' is wrong here? He went to jail is an event and before that he defaced public property so we can use had to represent an earlier action.

(May be you are right.) I think you are making this sentence a cause and relationship sentence but meaning intends HE did 2 things and not at different time frame.

As I wrote above also, another hint, look at the usage of "frequently" -- implies he may still be doing the same things, so HAS.

[RonPurewal]

He had frequently defaced public property and went to jail."

just want to understand why 'went' is wrong here? He went to jail is an event and before that he defaced public property so we can use had to represent an earlier action.

it's clear from context that these are meant to be interpreted as sequential events.
when events are in a sequence, they generally appear in the same tense.

[vivs.gupta]

He had frequently defaced public property and went to jail."

just want to understand why 'went' is wrong here? He went to jail is an event and before that he defaced public property so we can use had to represent an earlier action.

it's clear from context that these are meant to be interpreted as sequential events.
when events are in a sequence, they generally appear in the same tense.

Thanks, I agree. But, I wanted to check whether the usage of 'went' is grammatically wrong?

[tim]

"went" and "had defaced" don't go together. which one is "wrong" is up to you, but one of them would need to be changed in order to make the sentence correct..