4 ms·
I am a native born American English speaker and what you are saying isn't the case here. Omission of the word "has" in no way implies that the jacket doesn't st
by morpheos137 5y ago
I am a native born American English speaker and what you are saying isn't the case here. Omission of the word "has" in no way implies that the jacket doesn't still exist. Inclusion of the word "has" implies the creation of the jacket is in the past and is complete (not ongoing). It does not imply that the jacket necessarily still exists.
In formal grammatical terms including "has" makes the verb "created" past perfect (completed action) while excluding "has" makes the verb aorist or simple past tense (the completeness of the action is unspecified).
Whether or not the verb has "has" before it tells you nothing about the continuing existence of the object. "Has" modifies the verb not the noun.
- pmdulaney 5y agoI too am a native-born American speaker of English. But I must admit that the knowledge I have of the perfect tense comes from studying biblical Greek. In the case of Koine Greek (and ancient Greek generally I would think) the perfect does include the idea of a past action that still applies to the present. For example, "I have been forgiven" means that I am still forgiven.
- leephillips 5y agoYou’re correct, but “has created” is the present perfect. The past perfect would be “had created”. And those terms apply to the full construction including the auxiliary verb. “Created” is the past participle (identical to the past tense conjugation, as is often the case in English).