English: the present perfect "has replaced"

[AvidLearner#]

A mechanic has replaced a few parts in John's car. John has driven his car back home and put it in the garage. John's friend Peter is walking by John's garage when John notices him. They start talking. Peter then pays attention to John's car and says: "That's a nice car." John replies to him with the following sentence.

Yeah, it's almost like new. The mechanic has replaced parts A and B in it. I was in his garage only 20 minutes ago. But that's the last time I was there because he charges too much.

Would it be correct for John to use the present perfect "has replaced" to emphasize the present result that parts A and B in his car are now new (even though it's clear from the sentence that follows that the mechanic is not going to repair John's car anymore)? Thanks in advance.

[rdearman]

I don't know. But If I were going to say this sentence, it would be:

Yeah, it's almost like new. The mechanic replaced parts A and B. I was in his garage just 20 minutes ago. But it's the last time I'm going there because he charges too much.

[Iversen]

If you are going to sell the car then it is relevant that parts A and B are new, and that would be a good reason to use "has replaced". With just "replaced" you just tell someone what has happened - and use the opportunity to spread the information that this particular mechanic charges too much. And definitely "it's the last time" because you sound more angry with the simpler formulation.

[AvidLearner#]

Peter goes to place A. He does something there. Then he takes a train home. On the train, someone asks him why he visited place A, and he says the following to them:

3. I went there because I needed to find something. I've found what I was looking for.

4. I went there because I needed to find something. I found what I was looking for.

Both are correct. In version #3, the speaker kind of says: "I now have with me what I was looking for." In version #4, the emphasis is on what the speaker did in place A.

Does that make sense in British English? Thanks in advance.

[Cainntear]

Peter goes to place A. He does something there. Then he takes a train home. On the train, someone asks him why he visited place A, and he says the following to them:

3. I went there because I needed to find something. I've found what I was looking for.

4. I went there because I needed to find something. I found what I was looking for.

Both are correct. In version #3, the speaker kind of says: "I now have with me what I was looking for." In version #4, the emphasis is on what the speaker did in place A.

Does that make sense in British English? Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure why you're asking, because your text appears to be an explanation in the style of a teacher.

Are you asking specifically because your teacher is a speaker of American English and you want to confirm if the same goes elsewhere? Is it that you don't trust your teacher 100%? Or did you ask ChatGPT and now want confirmation?

[AvidLearner#]

Peter goes to place A. He does something there. Then he takes a train home. On the train, someone asks him why he visited place A, and he says the following to them:

3. I went there because I needed to find something. I've found what I was looking for.

4. I went there because I needed to find something. I found what I was looking for.

Both are correct. In version #3, the speaker kind of says: "I now have with me what I was looking for." In version #4, the emphasis is on what the speaker did in place A.

Does that make sense in British English? Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure why you're asking, because your text appears to be an explanation in the style of a teacher.

Are you asking specifically because your teacher is a speaker of American English and you want to confirm if the same goes elsewhere? Is it that you don't trust your teacher 100%? Or did you ask ChatGPT and now want confirmation?

I wrote that explanation myself. An American English speaker told me that only the simple past "I found" makes sense in my example. I think both would be correct in British English depending on what the speaker has in mind. I just want to know if I'm right.

[Cainntear]

I wrote that explanation myself. An American English speaker told me that only the simple past "I found" makes sense in my example. I think both would be correct in British English depending on what the speaker has in mind. I just want to know if I'm right.

Ah, I see -- that makes sense.

Yes, your explanation is 100% right, so clearly you're understanding the logic of it. I'm pleased to see how you're progressing with this one, as it's something that the attitude of "don't explain grammar, let them absorb it" really can't deal with.

In this instance, I think what I was thrown by was the sentence "Both are correct." To me that looked like an answer to the question "Which of these is right?" Picking out that sort of pattern is so subtle that I don't think I've ever seen any written rules or patterns about it... in any language! I suspect you've picked it up from the number of times people have responded to your queries here with those exact words!!

[AvidLearner#]

Thanks for the confirmation, Cainntear.

[AvidLearner#]

John is an archaeologist. He's come to country X. He starts digging in the hope of finding things that will prove his theory. Bob calls him, and John tells him that he's now in country X. Bob asks him: "What are you doing there?" To which John replies with one of the following versions:

1. I've done some research, and some of my findings have led me here. I hope to find things here that will prove my theory.

2. I did some research, and some of my findings led me here. I hope to find things here that will prove my theory.

In version #1, the speaker does some research, the findings of that research lead him to country X. When he arrives there, he immediately starts looking for what he hopes will prove his theory.

In version #2, the speaker does some research, the findings of that research lead him to country X. When he arrives in country X, he takes a break for a couple of days. For example, he goes to the beach and drinks a lot. Then he gets back to what he originally came for to country X: he starts looking for things that will prove his theory.

Would that be correct for British English? Do I understand the tenses correctly? Thanks in advance.

[golyplot]

As an American, only the past tense sounds natural to me in all your examples, but I guess that doesn't help if you're trying to understand British English.