I don't. Also, I don't think anyone here does. To say that some sentences can use either aspect and still be syntactically correct does not mean that they are interchangeable, that they mean the same thing, or that there is no difference between them.

________________________________________

Please tell us, Brian, in your own words, why you think the past tense and the past perfect tense are interchangeable, why you think they mean the same thing, why you think there is no difference between them.
.brad.11nov09.

--- On Tue, 11/10/09, O'Sullivan, Brian P <[log in to unmask]" ymailto="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I still think both "did" and "had" are appropriate. "Did" substitutes for the simple past verb "looked," whereas "had" is short for the past perfect "had looked." And both past and past perfect are possible here, for the reasons Bruce explained.

________________________________________

WE TOOK ALLIE TO BREAKFAST in the cook tent. With her dress washed and her hair combed, she looked a little better than she ___  when we dragged her out of the Barbary Coast Cafe'.

Which word should fill the blank in the quote above, had or did?

~~~~~
Incoming message: Both "had" and "did" are okay.

~~~~~

she looked a little better than she did <look> when we dragged her out

she looked a little better than she had <looked> when we dragged her out

Now what do you say?

.rsvp.brad.10nov09.

(she looked a little better than she looked when we dragged her out, is the one Parker did not use)