Past perfect The paragraph is part of a novel summary. I don't understand why past perfect is used in the second sentence. Shouldn't simple past be used instead? I'm asking because past perfect is about 'time up to then' but there's no reference point in the past here for the writer to jump back with past perfect. "After New York City, Arthur goes to Mexico City, to speak at a literary conference dedicated to the works of renowned writer Robert Brownburn. Arthur and Robert had had an extended romantic relationship when Arthur was in his twenties and when Robert was in his fifties. In Mexico City, Arthur is horrified to learn that he is schedule to speak alongside Marian Brownburn, Robert’s ex-wife, whom Robert had divorced after meeting Arthur."

was never XYZ I found this sentence as an example in a dictionary: Languages were never my forte. How do you understand the above sentence? One of my native speaker friends said this might still be relevant in the present. It means languages are still not my forte. Unless I misunderstood her, how come this is the case? I thought the simple past tense is used to talk about the past only. So my interpretation is that maybe now, I've become better at using/learning languages, or at least "languages were never my forte" is not the valid anymore. Also, is the sentence "Languages have never been my forte" correct to mean "languages were not my strong point and now they are still not?" Thank you

will vs present progressive What is the difference between these sentences? They both seem to refer to a fixed plan to me. They'll carry out their first official engagement together in Nottingham this coming Friday. They're carrying out their first official engagement together in Nottingham on Friday.

What does "hardly" mean in this context? Hello, I have trouble understanding this conversation. What does "hardly" mean in this context? It seems Jane misunderstood what Gray said but I don't know what it is. Gray: Her ex boyfriend is getting married and she's going to be depressed so... Jane: [She wasn't invited to the wedding? Gray: [I'm going to take her out She does[n't want to go.. Jane: [Hardly. Gray: No no. She's trying to stay away from the wedding idea.

"it roughly equaled in a hundred years what had been achieved in the previous thousand" "This was the fastest growth in world history by a very long shot—it roughly equaled in a hundred years what had been achieved in the previous thousand." What does the clause "it roughly equaled in a hundred years what had been achieved in the previous thousand" mean? Thank you!

Present perfect vs Simple Past Hello, I found this example in a grammar book: "A number of people have tried to find the treasure, but they have all failed." Is it possible to use simple past for the second clause? "A number of people have tried to find the treasure, but they all failed." If present perfect is the only option here, then why? I'd appreciate if anyone can explain the meaning of this sentence for me (i.e. how you understand/perceive this sentence). Thanks

"May" and "Can" (Humor) I came across this cartoon in a newspaper: Wife: Can I clean your glasses? Husband: I think you meant to say, "MAY I clean your glasses?" "May" is used when asking permission. Wife: "Can" is used if you don't have a paint scraper or and industrial solvent. What does the last line mean? What is the wife trying to say here? I can see that it has something to do with the usage of "may" and "can," but the last line makes no sense to me.

with any truth "Undoubtedly, he was a musical genius, but even his best friend could not say, with any truth, that he was physically attractive." I know that the man in this sentence is not very handsome, but the phrase "with any truth" confuses me. What does the phrase mean (in this sentence)?

Is this sentence grammatically correct? However, considering the fact many language courses failed their students, such as English being the worst-performed subject in the recent national exam or many students remembering nothing after an eight-week course, we have motivation to research this approach further.If it's incorrect or doesn't make sense, please help me correct/ rewrite it. Thank you :)