At first sight things 1.__ to be very simple: when talking about something that happened in the past we can simply say I checked my mail. However, there is more to it. Consider the following four sentences:
-
I have checked my mail. There’s nothing important.
-
I checked my mail when the client came.
-
I was checking my mail when the client came.
-
I had checked my mail when the client came.
This time the situation is even more 2._ than with present: here we have four different tenses for something that could be translated 3._ Croatian as Provjerio/la sam or provjeravao/la sam poštu. You might ask yourself if there really is a difference.
Let us see what the difference is and why we have to use different tenses for past events. I have checked my mail. There’s nothing important. I checked my mail five minutes ago. How many of your English lessons may have been spent on futile 4._ to make you use I have checked it? Moreover, when speaking, this form still 5._ (if at all) crosses your lips. And again, non-native speakers seem to agree that they can live perfectly well without it. However, those of us who 6.__ to perfection should maybe give one more try to understanding the logic behind the choice of I have checked, over the simple I checked.
In the first example the focus is on the result of an activity which has happened at an 7._ past time. When is irrelevant here but what 8._ is that NOW we know there are no important mails to deal with. However, if you want to 9.__ your colleague’s attention to the fact that you are absolutely sure there is nothing important to deal with because you checked the mail only five minutes ago you will stress exactly WHEN you did it by saying I checked it five minutes ago.