So in a court of law, the use of “did” which is explicitly past tense in English grammar is in reference to the present in a court of law, while the use of words ending in “ing” which is explicitly present tense in English grammar is in reference to the past? Please explain why two past tense words are made to be present tense.

This question is the only obstacle in my understanding of writing correspondences and notices and I would really like to get clarity on it so I understand why these changes are used.

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. yes, like ‘trespassing’ and also the punctuation of sentences is confusing me. Why ‘law common to i’ instead of ‘my law’ and why use ‘i’ when the word ‘me’ should be used.