A. is correct. B is wrong for the reasons outlined above. I respectfully submit that Denis is also incorrect to offer that using either of these sentences suggests that Dr. John had enjoyed a high prestige up until now but no longer does. "Has enjoyed" and "has been enjoying" (present perfect continuous) would as suggest enjoyment immediately up until the present (now), but would not suggest that said enjoyment has terminated. To say that Dr. John enjoyed a high prestige up until now but no longer does, it would be acceptable to say, "The late Dr. John of Cambridge University, had enjoyed a high prestige... or "had been enjoying..." However, I do not concur that Cherry's alternative C is correct, but for a different reason. By saying "has enjoyed" or even "has been enjoying" suggests that he still continues to enjoy the benefits, which can no longer be the case as the man is now deceased and not enjoying anything except a long eternal slumber. For what I believe you are trying to say, "The late Dr. John of Cambridge University, enjoyed a high prestige..." is the best approach. To Denis - I already pointed out that present perfect continuous does not make sense here in my ORIGINAL POST, so stop trying to argue this point. Meanwhile, you were simply wrong in saying: Using "has enjoyed" or '"has been enjoying" might indicate that he had enjoyed a high prestige up until now but no longer does. It would suggest that he recently died. This is simply an incorrect statement. You are wrong that these phrases suggest he recently died, or that he no longer enjoys a high prestige. (HINT: CHANGE THE WORD "HAS" TO "HAD"). Your improper use of grammar is particularly dangerous when you are attempting to coach or teach someone who may not recognize your errors. Cherry caught on and corrected herself unlike you. Look at her second post. She has wisely changed her suggestion. Good luck with your grammar struggles.

Denis's answers are generally spot on. However, there are possible deviations: (a) If the speaker said #1 immediately after talking about another boy in his or her partner's class, the context is there that would allow for this sentence to be correct. e.g. "John is pretty damn tall. I am taller than any other boy in your class." (b) #3 also might not be correct if the speaker is a girl, unless the situation was similar to (a) above).

Romulus's feedback is categorically incorrect. "He just wasn´t the right person for the job" is absolutely correct. You could also say, "He simply wasn't the right person for the job." I am not an English teacher by trade, but as a native English speaker, I have never heard of this rule, though it might be something of a shortcut or trick. Adverbs go in front of the verb or adjective they are describing. In this case, "just" describes "was." In most situations, when you use an adverb near a "to be" verb, it's because you are describing the adjective or verb immediately following it, which is the only way I can fathom how this became known as a "rule." I'd call it more of a tendency versus a rule. e.g. I was just minding my own business. (just describes "minding") e.g. Romulus was categorically incorrect. (categoically describes the nature of "incorrectness") "He wasn't just the right person for the job" means something completely different and doesn't mean anything if left alone. You might use this phrase in the following way: , "He wasn't just the right person for the job, he was the only person for the job." just describes "the right" in this case.