grammar problem, help~?
"They had dedicated and caring teachers."
at the words above, past perfect was used at first, and continuous at second.
however, must the tense be harmonized, doesn't?
it may be eliminated "had been" in front of 'caring' so,
can it be right?
somebody teach me~
Comments
Your questions about this sentence are appropriate and understandable.
Here is the dilemma. Many (if not most) words in English can have multiple functions, depending on the context.
You were absolutely right to see the "had" before "dedicated" and the "-ed" at the end of "dedicated" and to come to the conclusion that "dedicated" is a verb. It looks like one--especially with "had" preceding it.
Look at these sentences.
1. They had mashed potatoes.
2. They had mashed potatoes.
Without some additional information, we have no way of knowing which sentence is telling us that they had a kind of potatoes known as "mashed" potatoes (because they are all mushed up), or that they had been in the kitchen with a potato masher physically mashing the potatoes.
In the example you have given, the way you determine meaning has to do with the overall comprehensibility of the sentence.
For example, if I say...
"They had dedicated the love song to the bride and groom," we know that the construction "had dedicated" is past perfect. Why? Because there is a subject (They), verb (had dedicated) followed by a direct object (love song).
If we had said, "They had dedicated and sung the love song to the bride and groom," that also would be past perfect, with a compound verb: "They" is the subject, "had dedicated and sung" are participle forms of the verb. So it's past perfect.
But if we say "They had dedicated and caring teachers," we will discover that the sentence is not an example of a past perfect construction. Why? Because...
"They" is the subject, "had" is the verb, and "teachers" is the direct object. What kind of teachers? dedicated and caring. The sentence cannot be past perfect because in the phrase "dedicated and caring," "dedicated" MIGHT be a participle, but "caring" definitely is not. "Caring" would have to be "cared," and the result would be "They had dedicated and cared teachers." But that doesn't make any sense, so we have to come up with another possibility. And then we say, "A-HA! because we suddenly recognize that they must be adjectives modifying "teachers."
Does that make sense to you?
As others have said, "dedicated" and "caring" are participial adjectives. The subject of the sentence is "They;" the verb is "had;" the direct object is "teachers."
"Dedicated" and "caring" modify teachers. They are both participial adjectives, meaning they are derived from verbs but function as adjectives. "Dedicated" is a past participle adjective, and "caring" is a present participle adjective.
"Caring" could never be a verb by itself--it is not continous. It has to have a "be" verb with it to be a verb: Is caring, are caring, had been caring, am caring, etc.
Dude, english is awesome. Hey, those words look like verbs, but they're totally not. It's like, they're adjectives & work to modify "teachers" so the fact that they look like verbs kind of doesn't matter.
I am going to have had been having regrets about having not had written a better answer, but I'm tired.
You have the past tense, not the past perfect. The past perfect creates an awkward construction:
"They had had dedicated and caring teachers."
If past perfect tense is needed, then please choose this revision.
dedicated and caring are both adjectives modifying teachers.