I think maybe the black past tense verbs are auxiliary verbs.
Not exactly.
The difference between the ‘simple’ past tense and the ‘perfect’ past tense is one of ‘time’.
“Simple’ means “it’s happening with no reference to time whatsoever” with regard to the verb itself. It could be completed, or still happening.
“Perfect” means it is a ‘completed’ action in time.
For example”
“He walked to the park.” Vs.
“He had walked to the park.”
In the first ‘simple’ case, if we are talking about when someone was assaulted for example, a statement ‘he walked to the park’ could mean he was assaulted as he was walking to the park.
In the second ‘perfect’ (or perfected) case, ‘he had walked to the park’ contains the ‘time element’ of conclusion. The walk is finished. So his assault has to have been ‘after he had arrived’ at the park. Not during the walk.
Policeman: “When did the assault occur?”
Person: “I’m not sure”.
Policeman: “Can you tell me what happened?”
Person: “He left the house and walked to the park.” (Both simple tense verbs).
Policeman. “When did he leave the house?”
Person: About 11:00 I think.
FROM THE ABOVE the assault could well have happened while he was walking to the park. We still don’t know.
Policeman: “When did the assault occur?”
Person: “I’m not sure”.
Policeman: “Can you tell me what happened?”
Person: “He had left the house and had walked to the park.” (Both perfect tense verbs).
Policeman. “When did he leave the house?”
Person: About 11:00 I think.
FROM THE ABOVE we know by use of the perfect tense, he had left the house and made it all the way to the park before the assault occurred. The word “had” ‘perfects’ or “completes” the issue of the walk to the park.
This can make a big difference in time and timing.
If he was assaulted on his way to the park, it would be fairly easy to pin down an approximate time. Calculations of approximate walking time, location of the assault, etc. would make it simple.
However, if he had completed his walk to the park and the body was found at some time later, it could be much more difficult to pin down a time of the assault.
The same is true of the ‘perfect’ tense vs. the ‘continuous’ tense.
Note the diffference if what is said is “He left the house and was walking to the park”. Far more clear than the ambiguous “he walked to the park.”
(And frankly, this verb tense issue is hugely critical in the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek of the Bible. Massive misunderstandings occur by sloppy translators mistranslating the verb tenses as they were given in the original texts…or the best representations of the originals we have.)
Just one example for now…. I’ll come back with more later.
Just think of the “simple” tense as being totally without ‘time’ sense at all. So ‘time’ must be extracted from surrounding text.
And the “perfect” (completed or perfected) tense as clearly indicating “time’ in the sense of what is in view being “completed in the past.”
And “Continuous” as ‘happening and still going on’…. Whether past, present and future
Example of continuous…. ‘He was walking to the park..’. I.e. it ‘was’ in the past but ‘was still going on’ when he was assaulted.