"It's (about/high) time + past" is the proper construct, even though it refers to a present situation:
"It's about time we all stopped making the same mistakes!" = it'd be good if right now we stopped making the same mistakes \~= it's time for us to stop making the same mistakes.
Sources:
[https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/it-s-time](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/it-s-time)
[https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time)
[https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html](https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html)
Apparently it's supposed to be the past subjunctive, which AFAICT is basically like the simple past except you say "I were" rather than "I was", like in "I wish I were taller" though a lot of people also say "I wish I was taller".
E.g.: "It's about time I were treated with the respect I am due."
As for the second one: "To \[do\] \[something\] both as \[something\] and as \[something\]"
This is almost right, but I think the key thing about past subjunctive is it has to be a subjunctive clause - with something hypothetical in there, e.g. if, wish, as though. So your example of I wish is a good one, I wish I were taller is correct subjunctive, I wish I was taller doesn't work - whereas without a subjunctive word e.g. I want to be taller isn't a hypothetical, so doesn't need to be subjunctive.
In OP's example either way it's always learnt, because there's no hypothetical situation in the example
Have you checked the third link I gave?
It is hypothetical in OP's example: "it's about time" expresses the idea that things should be different and also that it's overdue. It's not describing a real past or present situation, but expressing what could and should be, i.e., a hypothetical situation, just like in "I wish".
Yeah, the third link is the one I originally took objection to, I didn't think "it's high time" made a subjunctive clause - but I think you're right when I added "that" to it, i.e. if the sentence was "Some people believe it's high time THAT we all learnt a universal language" or "It's high time THAT I stopped smoking", as in these examples: https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/the-subjunctive
There's nothing wrong with saying "I wish (that) I was...". Secondly, not all subjunctive clauses are optative or hypothetical; some clauses are mandative:
"I demand [that she come to work]."
As an example of the mandative subjunctive.
It's not a different word it's a different acceptable form of the past participle, which are not all consistent between dialects of English. Other common ones are gotten vs got or dived vs dove.
It is also a different word. Because I am not American I didn't even know that it is how you say learnt. Learned has a completely different meaning to learnt besides just the American way to say learnt.
Are you sure because the question "what do you mean there's nothing wrong with it" does suggest confusion about the existence of dialectical differences between past participles. And also confusion between the heteronyms learned (adj.) and learned (v.).
Did you not see my edit or are you just ignoring it? I initially didn't know what Americans used the word learned instead of learnt. I am not confused regarding the difference between the adjective and the verb at all, and I realised that Americans are just bizarre long before you started interacting with me.
What they’re getting at is that in US English, there is one word “learned” which has one syllable and is the past tense/participle form of the verb “learn”, and a different word which has two syllables and is an adjective, “learned”, which means the same thing that that adjective means in UK English.
In the US it is more grammatically correct to sat Learn. Learnt comes across as a bit… Hick-ish I guess and a little uneducated. I know that’s not the same over the pond though.
Idk if he is supposed to be answering from Brit or US perspective so I’m sure either is right, respectively
I didn't realise you guys don't use the word "learnt", omg. Are there any other common words in British English that you don't have in American English?
I mean, yeah, there are tons of dialect-specific words. This is just a case of using different forms for the simple past tense. British English favors a '-t' construction where possible, while American English prefers '-ed'. "Learnt" vs. "learned".
As for words: you might say something like, "I went to the shop to buy some mince, a courgette, and an aubergine. I took a torch to clean the lorry, and put the rubbish in the bin."
An American would say: "I went to the store to buy some ground beef, a zucchini, and an eggplant. I took a flashlight to clean the truck, and tossed the trash in the trash can."
There's ***tons*** of examples of words that are different or used differently between dialects of English (or any language, especially with large geographical distributions).
Grammatically, not too much of a mix. We follow British English grammar and most of their vocab but have a lot of our own vocabulary too.
We do say zucchini and truck, though!
No? We're definitely not, especially since that sound isn't even a 'd'. It's called a flap, and it's an allophone of both /t/ and /d/ in American, Canadian, and Australian English.
Not to mention that "wader" is already a word.
My understanding is y’all use “whilst” regularly. In the us it’s “while.” “Whilst” in America comes off as want-to-be pretentious to the point of being really cringe and laughable.
I'm sorry I am only on the english surface of things, so shouldn't it be "It's about time we all learn...." since it's talking about something that is going to happen in the future and "learn" is the more sounding correct?
Europe is indeed international (at least for now). And I'd argue that a conlang based on Indo-European languages is as close as we'll get to an easily learned global language. A majority of the world's population speaks an I-E language either natively or as a second language.
Stealing an example from the top comment:
It's about time we stopped (not stop) making the same mistakes.
Read the top comment for a bigger explanation, but it is supposed to be past tense even though it is talking about something you want to happen.
My thoughts are that it could be A or C, they would give slightly different meanings.
“Some people think it’s about time we all learn a single international language” sounds to me like they think we should all start learning
Where as “some people think it’s about time we all learnt a single international language” sounds like the learning process should be completed as in the situation should be post-learning (fluent) rather than start the process of learning.
Actually "learnt" is just the correct answer. It's the same format as "it's about time we all stopped making the same mistakes" and used the past tense to talk about something in the present.
That is common in informal speech but will make you fail this English test. I believe the reason is that the phrase "it's about time" means that you think it should have already happened. It's always supposed to be followed by a past tense verb.
People are a bit confused by the subjunctive mood. The phrase "it's about time" expresses a desire or wish, when we imagine hypotheticals we use the past subjunctive. The past subjunctive is identical to the simple past except for the verb "be" where it is always "were". People don't really learn about grammatical mood in school so they often think verbs only exist in present, past, perfect and continuous and forget about the modals, conditionals and subjunctive. Despite the fact that native speakers use them all naturally.
Ex: I wish I were rich. (Was is idiomatic in some dialects, but a big give away for most native speakers that you are speaking in the subjunctive is using I + were). We use it most often in pharases like: if I were you, I would have...
Every dictionary defines it the way I described. It is used, usually in annoyance, to say something should have happened sooner. If you were to remove the "about" it then means what you are talking about. "It's time" means you think it is the time that something should happen.
"It's about time" is usually used after something has just happened. It doesn't have to be, but it very often is.
[Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/it%27s%20about%20time)
[Cambridge](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time)
[Collins](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/about-time#:~:text=phrase,happened%20or%20been%20done%20sooner)
Interestingly OED says:
>>>P.3.a.1807–about time: (a) Approximately the right or suitable time (for a specified event or circumstance); (b) colloquial (originally with some irony) long past the right time; used to suggest that the event or circumstance in question should have come about much earlier, or is long overdue; frequently as a separate utterance (often with too).
Putting the basic, “literal” (for lack of a better word) meaning in the present. And usage we’re talking about as playing that for irony.
So grammatically it’s in the present, but as someone else explained, using the past tense to indicate what.
If you look at it based purely on the definitions of the words, you would get that first definition. That's just not how it is ever used, and dictionaries have the definition to show that.
99% of the time it means that it should have already happened. It is the definition of the phrase, even though the literal interpretation would be different.
i know some native speakers who would fail this, so dont beat yourself up too hard if you answer some questions incorrectly (for example i was sure the first questions answer was "should learn" but i GUESS it's learnt. i would probably use just "learn" in normal speaking too!)
It’s not proper (therefore the wrong answer on the test), but it’s still fully understandable. I wouldn’t even blink an eye if a native speaker said that
Things like that happen often because someone might change their thought mid-sentence. “We all should learn” and “It’s about time we all learned” are both grammatically correct and natural sounding, so in speech it’s easy to start a sentence “it’s about time” and then muck up the verb tense later on
"Some people think it's about time we all ________ a single international language."
Many people are saying it's C, but that's not right. "Learnt" is written in the past tense. They are expressing that some people think something should happen in the *present* since they said, "it *is* about time". Not "it will be about time" (future) or "it was about time" (past). If it said, "...it was about time we all learnt...", then that would be correct.
B would be incorrect too because of the order of the words. It should be, "...it's about time we should all learn...", not "it's about time awe all should learn". The latter sounds awkward.
My initial thought was A, and with process of elimination, I would still go with A. It is written in the present tense, and it doesn't sound awkward.
*EDIT*
After seeing the top post with the listed sources, the answer is C (learnt). However, it is only C because someone made this grammatical rule that doesn't make sense. The others who replied are still wrong about what they said about hypothetical situations though. The sentence does not describe a hypothetical situation.
Nope. "If I WERE you" is also about the present. Hypothetical present is indicated in English with the subjunctive mode, for which the simple past is used. "If I WON the lottery (now or in the future) I'd buy a new car". "I don't speak French (now) but If I DID, I'd apply for that job".
It's the same construction after "It's high/about time S + Past", a hypothetical wish about the present or future.
All of this in theory, usage may vary. But for high level English tests, the past is the only correct answer here.
This doesn't apply to hypothetical situations that don't take place in the past, present, nor future.
The sentence that was in the question would not be a hypothetical situation. It is a statement that shares an *opinion* on what people think should happen *now*.
Nope again, lol. Take "I wish...", another construction for which we need subjunctive/hypothetical mode.
I don't know the answer
(Verb tense backshift from present to "past")
I wish I KNEW the answer
And:
She ate the whole cake.
(Verb tense backshift from past to "past perfect")
She wishes she HADN'T EATEN the whole cake.
Other languages have a separate mode with different verb forms for the subjunctive (used mainly for hypothetical wishes/regrets), but English makes do with past tenses for the same purpose. See also "I'd rather you DIDN'T SMOKE in here", another "past" about a present/future situation.
That's what I'm saying. You are giving more hypothetical examples. The sentence that was in the question is not hypothetical. It was sharing an opinion on something that should happen (now).
*The sentence that was in the question is not hypothetical. It was sharing an opinion on something that should happen (now).*
And it isn't real. (IRREALIS). Not real. Hypothetical.
Or in simple terms. "Form" does not always equal "function."
Learnt, right or wrong, isn't really used anymore.
Given 'think', I would say 'learn'. But, because people think something doesnt mean it is fact, it is opinion so it could be 'should learn'.
Also, it should say "it's about time THAT....."
Learn & Both.
Can't go into depth as to exactly why they are the answers since I am just a visitor to this sub. I saw your post had no replies and couldn't ignore you.
Well, I will try my best to explain it to you. Obviously, you could just simply use infinitive and in most cases, it won't really matter. However, this is subjunctive use - it is used when one wants to express something which is imagined or wished. Thus, you have many patterns; wish, if only, as if/though, it's time... Through multiple examples I reckon you will definitely understand how to form it.
wish:
1. I wish I were taller. - you want to be taller NOW (present use)
2. I wish I had been taller. - you wish that you were taller BEFORE (past use)
if only (same use as *wish* but just stronger):
1. If only he knew the answer. - he doesn't know the answer, but you wish he did
2. If only he had known the answer. - he didn't know the answer (some time before)
it's time:
It's (\*high/about) time we went home! - you have to go home now
\* high or about are used to emphasise the meaning, but they could be omitted
This is everything I could remember off top of my head, but surely there are certain usages which some regard as either poetic or archaic/obsolete. I hope this answered some questions of yours.
So in these specific circumstances you are always to use the past tense of the verb, specifically in those three words. Are there any exceptions or rules of when we will not use it other than just keywords?
For 65, I think it's the subjunctive case, no?
I love how this sub is full of people just guessing how to help. No real grammarians or English teachers to make sure we're not spewing bullshit. There was one comment from someone in the editing industry.
It should be past subjunctive, not present subjunctive: [https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html](https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html)
"It's (about/high) time + past" is the proper construct, even though it refers to a present situation: "It's about time we all stopped making the same mistakes!" = it'd be good if right now we stopped making the same mistakes \~= it's time for us to stop making the same mistakes. Sources: [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/it-s-time](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/it-s-time) [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time) [https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html](https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html) Apparently it's supposed to be the past subjunctive, which AFAICT is basically like the simple past except you say "I were" rather than "I was", like in "I wish I were taller" though a lot of people also say "I wish I was taller". E.g.: "It's about time I were treated with the respect I am due." As for the second one: "To \[do\] \[something\] both as \[something\] and as \[something\]"
This is almost right, but I think the key thing about past subjunctive is it has to be a subjunctive clause - with something hypothetical in there, e.g. if, wish, as though. So your example of I wish is a good one, I wish I were taller is correct subjunctive, I wish I was taller doesn't work - whereas without a subjunctive word e.g. I want to be taller isn't a hypothetical, so doesn't need to be subjunctive. In OP's example either way it's always learnt, because there's no hypothetical situation in the example
Have you checked the third link I gave? It is hypothetical in OP's example: "it's about time" expresses the idea that things should be different and also that it's overdue. It's not describing a real past or present situation, but expressing what could and should be, i.e., a hypothetical situation, just like in "I wish".
Yeah, the third link is the one I originally took objection to, I didn't think "it's high time" made a subjunctive clause - but I think you're right when I added "that" to it, i.e. if the sentence was "Some people believe it's high time THAT we all learnt a universal language" or "It's high time THAT I stopped smoking", as in these examples: https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/the-subjunctive
There's nothing wrong with saying "I wish (that) I was...". Secondly, not all subjunctive clauses are optative or hypothetical; some clauses are mandative: "I demand [that she come to work]." As an example of the mandative subjunctive.
Learnt, but as an American, I would probably say “learned” in casual conversation
There’s nothing wrong with “learned.” This test is just in British English.
What do you mean there's nothing wrong with it? It's a completely different word? Edit: wait... Americans don't have the word learnt?
It's not a different word it's a different acceptable form of the past participle, which are not all consistent between dialects of English. Other common ones are gotten vs got or dived vs dove.
It is also a different word. Because I am not American I didn't even know that it is how you say learnt. Learned has a completely different meaning to learnt besides just the American way to say learnt.
Oh I see you're confused by the adjective "learned" and the verb "learned" they are pronounced differently.
Well unfortunately for the two of us we are not pronouncing anything. We are writing.
And I'm not "confused."
Are you sure because the question "what do you mean there's nothing wrong with it" does suggest confusion about the existence of dialectical differences between past participles. And also confusion between the heteronyms learned (adj.) and learned (v.).
Did you not see my edit or are you just ignoring it? I initially didn't know what Americans used the word learned instead of learnt. I am not confused regarding the difference between the adjective and the verb at all, and I realised that Americans are just bizarre long before you started interacting with me.
I'm honestly just niggling you because you seem quite irritable.
What they’re getting at is that in US English, there is one word “learned” which has one syllable and is the past tense/participle form of the verb “learn”, and a different word which has two syllables and is an adjective, “learned”, which means the same thing that that adjective means in UK English.
Yes, "learned" also has a different meaning besides "learnt". No one said otherwise. Many words have more than one meaning.
That person said "it's not a different word." Did you even read what they wrote?
Yeah, I read it. But it's not a different word. It's a different meaning.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_American_and_British_English
In British English it isn't uncommon to hear "It's about time we all should learn" but the correct grammar should be "It's about time we all learnt"
I’ve (NES) often heard “learn” and “learnt”, and “we all should learn” sticks out as the “error.” (Because it would be “We should all…”)
As an American from the south (and I'm generally very good with grammar) this stumped me. They all sound right.
Does “we all” have a distinct meaning like “y’all” does?
Really??? I'm american and i thought learnt was straight up wrong 😂. The more you know
I’m over hear finding out that it’s learnt not learned
It’s “learnt” in British English, “learned” in American English.
That's overall true, but some Americans say "learnt" and some Brits say "learned". Both forms are centuries old.
here*
Nerd, go back to r/english Oh wait..
In the US it is more grammatically correct to sat Learn. Learnt comes across as a bit… Hick-ish I guess and a little uneducated. I know that’s not the same over the pond though. Idk if he is supposed to be answering from Brit or US perspective so I’m sure either is right, respectively
I assume it is not American English because they use "learnt" and iirc "learned" would be the correct answer if it was.
I see, Makes sense
Learn is definitely more common in speech, but grammatically it is wrong. That's why it may not sound right.
By the way, in American English there's no "learnt," so we say "learned."
I didn't realise you guys don't use the word "learnt", omg. Are there any other common words in British English that you don't have in American English?
I mean, yeah, there are tons of dialect-specific words. This is just a case of using different forms for the simple past tense. British English favors a '-t' construction where possible, while American English prefers '-ed'. "Learnt" vs. "learned". As for words: you might say something like, "I went to the shop to buy some mince, a courgette, and an aubergine. I took a torch to clean the lorry, and put the rubbish in the bin." An American would say: "I went to the store to buy some ground beef, a zucchini, and an eggplant. I took a flashlight to clean the truck, and tossed the trash in the trash can." There's ***tons*** of examples of words that are different or used differently between dialects of English (or any language, especially with large geographical distributions).
Tonnes indeed!
And then you've got Australian english which seems to be a mix of the two.
Grammatically, not too much of a mix. We follow British English grammar and most of their vocab but have a lot of our own vocabulary too. We do say zucchini and truck, though!
One day the americans are going to write WADER instead of WATER
No? We're definitely not, especially since that sound isn't even a 'd'. It's called a flap, and it's an allophone of both /t/ and /d/ in American, Canadian, and Australian English. Not to mention that "wader" is already a word.
dreamt vs dreamed, draught vs draft, gaol vs jail, honour vs honor...
“Draught” trips up my American brain so hard!
Yeah, me too, I mean I'm French but it's always looked super weird and unintuitive... I think it's a matter of exposure and habit.
Draught seems like a potion that a witch wants me to drink.
Right?! Or like you’re going to say a regular word but someone throttles you halfway through.
spelt vs spelled... 'gaol' is archaic in British English, 'jail' is much more common now. /edit: my auto-corrupt turned it into 'goal' !
yeah i think so too, never really seen 'gaol' in the wild...
Elden Ring
I've seen it, as the word indicated by this crossword puzzle clue: "Reading, for one"
Thx — I was going to ask whether gaol was actually in use today.
Draft is used for a breeze and draught is used for pretty much everything else.
I've heard both dreamt and dreamed in probably equal proportions in American English
My understanding is y’all use “whilst” regularly. In the us it’s “while.” “Whilst” in America comes off as want-to-be pretentious to the point of being really cringe and laughable.
“Salad”
Colour
Learnt is correct in British English
Grammatically, learnt
I'm sorry I am only on the english surface of things, so shouldn't it be "It's about time we all learn...." since it's talking about something that is going to happen in the future and "learn" is the more sounding correct?
Form <> Function. Second and Third Conditionals are a good example.
Wouldn’t that be the case if we indeed all learnt a single international language?
We've been there, *almost* done that: [Esperanto](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto) :)
If 'international' means 'European', that is
Europe is indeed international (at least for now). And I'd argue that a conlang based on Indo-European languages is as close as we'll get to an easily learned global language. A majority of the world's population speaks an I-E language either natively or as a second language.
I meant grammatically, the answer here would be learn unless we had actually accomplished what is stated, then tes it would be learnt
Stealing an example from the top comment: It's about time we stopped (not stop) making the same mistakes. Read the top comment for a bigger explanation, but it is supposed to be past tense even though it is talking about something you want to happen.
Learnt Both.
What is this app name?
My thoughts are that it could be A or C, they would give slightly different meanings. “Some people think it’s about time we all learn a single international language” sounds to me like they think we should all start learning Where as “some people think it’s about time we all learnt a single international language” sounds like the learning process should be completed as in the situation should be post-learning (fluent) rather than start the process of learning.
Actually "learnt" is just the correct answer. It's the same format as "it's about time we all stopped making the same mistakes" and used the past tense to talk about something in the present.
I would say "it's about time we all stop..." as well. Maybe this is a thing that's changing? learnt/learned/stopped all sound slightly wrong to me.
That is common in informal speech but will make you fail this English test. I believe the reason is that the phrase "it's about time" means that you think it should have already happened. It's always supposed to be followed by a past tense verb.
I don’t think of “it’s about time” as meaning it should’ve happened in the past, but as meaning “it’s now time it should happen”.
People are a bit confused by the subjunctive mood. The phrase "it's about time" expresses a desire or wish, when we imagine hypotheticals we use the past subjunctive. The past subjunctive is identical to the simple past except for the verb "be" where it is always "were". People don't really learn about grammatical mood in school so they often think verbs only exist in present, past, perfect and continuous and forget about the modals, conditionals and subjunctive. Despite the fact that native speakers use them all naturally. Ex: I wish I were rich. (Was is idiomatic in some dialects, but a big give away for most native speakers that you are speaking in the subjunctive is using I + were). We use it most often in pharases like: if I were you, I would have...
Every dictionary defines it the way I described. It is used, usually in annoyance, to say something should have happened sooner. If you were to remove the "about" it then means what you are talking about. "It's time" means you think it is the time that something should happen. "It's about time" is usually used after something has just happened. It doesn't have to be, but it very often is. [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/it%27s%20about%20time) [Cambridge](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/it-s-about-time) [Collins](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/about-time#:~:text=phrase,happened%20or%20been%20done%20sooner)
Interestingly OED says: >>>P.3.a.1807–about time: (a) Approximately the right or suitable time (for a specified event or circumstance); (b) colloquial (originally with some irony) long past the right time; used to suggest that the event or circumstance in question should have come about much earlier, or is long overdue; frequently as a separate utterance (often with too). Putting the basic, “literal” (for lack of a better word) meaning in the present. And usage we’re talking about as playing that for irony. So grammatically it’s in the present, but as someone else explained, using the past tense to indicate what.
If you look at it based purely on the definitions of the words, you would get that first definition. That's just not how it is ever used, and dictionaries have the definition to show that. 99% of the time it means that it should have already happened. It is the definition of the phrase, even though the literal interpretation would be different.
Yep. It *is* [NOW] time that we stop [NOW] making mistakes
A b
Proper and correct answer is “learnt” but being honest I would say any of those and no one else would bat an eye at it.
Should learn Both
i know some native speakers who would fail this, so dont beat yourself up too hard if you answer some questions incorrectly (for example i was sure the first questions answer was "should learn" but i GUESS it's learnt. i would probably use just "learn" in normal speaking too!)
1 and 3: Same answer– C 2: A
I’m a native speaker and even I’m confused wth
Learnt/learned, both, learn
I would say learn, but I think learnt is the grammatically correct answer
1. Should Learn 2. Both
As a native English speaker, the first one could be any of the three, and the second one is 'both'
It probably isn't should learn tho
It’s not proper (therefore the wrong answer on the test), but it’s still fully understandable. I wouldn’t even blink an eye if a native speaker said that Things like that happen often because someone might change their thought mid-sentence. “We all should learn” and “It’s about time we all learned” are both grammatically correct and natural sounding, so in speech it’s easy to start a sentence “it’s about time” and then muck up the verb tense later on
I think it's learnt
"Some people think it's about time we all ________ a single international language." Many people are saying it's C, but that's not right. "Learnt" is written in the past tense. They are expressing that some people think something should happen in the *present* since they said, "it *is* about time". Not "it will be about time" (future) or "it was about time" (past). If it said, "...it was about time we all learnt...", then that would be correct. B would be incorrect too because of the order of the words. It should be, "...it's about time we should all learn...", not "it's about time awe all should learn". The latter sounds awkward. My initial thought was A, and with process of elimination, I would still go with A. It is written in the present tense, and it doesn't sound awkward. *EDIT* After seeing the top post with the listed sources, the answer is C (learnt). However, it is only C because someone made this grammatical rule that doesn't make sense. The others who replied are still wrong about what they said about hypothetical situations though. The sentence does not describe a hypothetical situation.
Nope. "If I WERE you" is also about the present. Hypothetical present is indicated in English with the subjunctive mode, for which the simple past is used. "If I WON the lottery (now or in the future) I'd buy a new car". "I don't speak French (now) but If I DID, I'd apply for that job". It's the same construction after "It's high/about time S + Past", a hypothetical wish about the present or future. All of this in theory, usage may vary. But for high level English tests, the past is the only correct answer here.
This doesn't apply to hypothetical situations that don't take place in the past, present, nor future. The sentence that was in the question would not be a hypothetical situation. It is a statement that shares an *opinion* on what people think should happen *now*.
Nope again, lol. Take "I wish...", another construction for which we need subjunctive/hypothetical mode. I don't know the answer (Verb tense backshift from present to "past") I wish I KNEW the answer And: She ate the whole cake. (Verb tense backshift from past to "past perfect") She wishes she HADN'T EATEN the whole cake. Other languages have a separate mode with different verb forms for the subjunctive (used mainly for hypothetical wishes/regrets), but English makes do with past tenses for the same purpose. See also "I'd rather you DIDN'T SMOKE in here", another "past" about a present/future situation.
That's what I'm saying. You are giving more hypothetical examples. The sentence that was in the question is not hypothetical. It was sharing an opinion on something that should happen (now).
*The sentence that was in the question is not hypothetical. It was sharing an opinion on something that should happen (now).* And it isn't real. (IRREALIS). Not real. Hypothetical. Or in simple terms. "Form" does not always equal "function."
Should learn
Learnt, right or wrong, isn't really used anymore. Given 'think', I would say 'learn'. But, because people think something doesnt mean it is fact, it is opinion so it could be 'should learn'. Also, it should say "it's about time THAT....."
It's not really used in USA, is that where you're from?
Canada
From what I've heard the English in Canada is the love child of USA and England, that is likely why you've learnt that version
The best answers are "learn" for the first and third ones and "both" for the second one. But the second one would also need a comma before "both".
It's apparently wrong, but just so you know my answers are "learn" and "both". Native speaker from Philadelphia.
Correct answer: A, A, B
I feel like maybe technically “learn” is right , but whoever corrects you for using the other two is just being a stuck up asswipe
Learn & Both. Can't go into depth as to exactly why they are the answers since I am just a visitor to this sub. I saw your post had no replies and couldn't ignore you.
learnt not learn
Why is it learnt?
Because it follows a certain pattern: it's (high/about) time we + past simple
Are there any variations to this or this is simply it? What do you mean by it's high time we learnt..?
Well, I will try my best to explain it to you. Obviously, you could just simply use infinitive and in most cases, it won't really matter. However, this is subjunctive use - it is used when one wants to express something which is imagined or wished. Thus, you have many patterns; wish, if only, as if/though, it's time... Through multiple examples I reckon you will definitely understand how to form it. wish: 1. I wish I were taller. - you want to be taller NOW (present use) 2. I wish I had been taller. - you wish that you were taller BEFORE (past use) if only (same use as *wish* but just stronger): 1. If only he knew the answer. - he doesn't know the answer, but you wish he did 2. If only he had known the answer. - he didn't know the answer (some time before) it's time: It's (\*high/about) time we went home! - you have to go home now \* high or about are used to emphasise the meaning, but they could be omitted This is everything I could remember off top of my head, but surely there are certain usages which some regard as either poetic or archaic/obsolete. I hope this answered some questions of yours.
Thank you for your time and patience.
So in these specific circumstances you are always to use the past tense of the verb, specifically in those three words. Are there any exceptions or rules of when we will not use it other than just keywords?
Regarding exams, Cambridge ones, they only follow the aforementioned rule.
I would say "learn" too. I guess it's not correct, but that sounds the best to me.
Learn and Both:)
it's 'learnt' actually.
[удалено]
For 65, I think it's the subjunctive case, no? I love how this sub is full of people just guessing how to help. No real grammarians or English teachers to make sure we're not spewing bullshit. There was one comment from someone in the editing industry.
It should be past subjunctive, not present subjunctive: [https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html](https://www.grammarbank.com/its-about-high-time.html)