The difference is under the rules of English grammar, "I have eaten" (the past participle form of the word "eat") makes sense, while "I have ate" (the simple past tense form of the word "eat) does not. "I ate" does make sense, however, and it has the same meaning as "I have eaten".
i have eaten
No, the word 'ate' is the past tense of the verb to eat (eats, eating, eaten, ate).
No. The correct form is "I shouldn't have eaten that."
ate. eat. eaten. will eat.It is an auxiliary verb.It is the past participle of eat.eat / ate / eatenI eat rice everydayWe ate rice yesterday.We have eaten rice all this week.Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Is_eaten_a_verb#ixzz1BLbBrrCv
Yes, the verb in the sentence is 'love'.'you' is a pronoun, subject of the sentence;'eating' is a noun (gerund), the direct object of the verb.
Ate is a past tense verb while eaten is not
The past participle of "ate" is "eaten."
you have already eaten
Eating is the present participle; eaten is the past participle.
Eaten is the past participle of eat, not the past tense. Ate is the past tense.
i have eaten
ate or has eaten.
She got eaten by the leeches because she ate a banana. The leeches smelled the banana, and therefore ate her.
The simple past tense of "eat" is "ate" The past participel of "eat" is "eaten" The present tense of "eat" is I/you/we/they eat. He/she/it eats. The present participle is "eating"
I jst ate it
ate
No. Eat is present tense, ate is past tense, and eaten is the past participle.