Even when it comes to questions, the pronoun of interrogation often counts as a previous direct object. For example, the female form of fallen has fallen; The plural form of gone went. As you may expect, we will not add any more -s if the past party already ends in -s. Thus, the past participant to sit (to sit) remains seated in the male plural (although it becomes in the female and plural singular in Assisi or sitting). Reflexive If the subject is the direct object of the verb, the past participation of the compound past will be in agreement with it (see Reflective). In this case the leg comes before the verb and so the past participant is feminine, although the subject, it, is masculine. The most common reflexive verb, in which the past participant could change its pronunciation, is to sit > it sits. In most other common reflexive verbs, the past participant ends in a vowel. For example, in her dress, the extra-e does not change the pronunciation. In reality, speakers do not tend to add agreements with having in daily speech. They probably only make these agreements by speaking carefully and thinking about the written language when they speak.
So if they don`t read a script, you could say: She cut off her hand. She cut off his hand. [The hand is the direct object (here becomes an indirect pronodem of an object that indicates to whom the hand was cut). As the hand does not precede the participatory, there is no agreement.] However, if the direct object passes before the past participates, the past participant actually corresponds to that direct object. For example, for a long time, banning students from past French participatory agreements was not as difficult as it was initially. There are two basic principles, each with a nuance: nuance: some ”be verbs” can be used with direct objects, in which case they are combined with have (see excipients). When these verbs are conjugated with have, they are consistent with the rule of agreement for holding verbs (below). Gently! If the subject is indirectly the subject of a reflexive sentence, there is no agreement. There are a few cases of reflexive verbs in which the reflexive pronoun actually represents an indirect object, usually with the sensation of ”myself”, for oneself, ”self,” etc. For example, many people want to avoid the direct object agreement – what do you think? Read the article and chat on Facebook: In fact, that the past of participation agrees with the direct object presents itself as a better explanation. This is better because then the same rule explains what happens in some rarer cases of reflexive verbs, where the reflexive pronoun is not really the direct object. A previous direct object does not necessarily have to appear as a pronoun just before the oral clause.
If the compound past is used in a relative clause, the modified name could be an earlier direct object (see relative pronouns). The previous participant of the compound past will always reflect the gender and number of previous direct objects (see the object`s pronouns). Example: Here I went to school. [First person Singular to ”be” – past participantle of ”all”].