Mention or had mentioned in my context

Question

I received the parcel this morning. I was a bit surprised when I opened it that you did not enclose a book with the goods because I had mentioned in my answer to your last email that I preferred a book over a discount code . After reading the message in the parcel I realized that my answer had not been sent and was still in my draft folder .

"had mentioned or mentioned" in this context.

Does "I mentioned" conveys the meaning that my reply was done after the seller's last email and before the seller sent the parcel? .

I think "mentioned" is enough to convey this meaning since "because" is mentioned .If an event is the cause of something it is obligatory that the cause (my answer)was written before its result ( the surprise of finding no book enclosed).

So the sequence of events seems to be clear without past perfect

There's nothing wrong with using the past perfect here, but, as you say, the meaning is clear without it. — Kate Bunting, Dec 10 '23 at 08:50
Does this answer your question? Canonical Post #2: What is the perfect, and how should I use it? To which the "short and sweet" answer should be As little as possible! — FumbleFingers, Dec 10 '23 at 14:07

score 1 · Accepted Answer · answered Dec 10 '23 at 08:03

The simple past mentioned should be enough as the sequence of events is clear.

That last email is understood to be the most recent one before the parcel delivery. It would be unlikely that a reasonable person would refer to emails or arrangements post-delivery and expect the already-delivered parcel to conform to them.

Mention or had mentioned in my context

1 Answers1