I see this kind of thing occasionally, and by that I mean the usage of ていた
forms:

> 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **ていた**

in narrative where the た form:

> 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **た**

would have meant the same thing to me. What is the difference in
meaning/nuance I'm missing here?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-22T00:40:01.300
21402
2015-01-22T11:20:48.730
2015-01-22T00:52:43.433
9207
question
meaning aspect
usage of ていた in 俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれていた
弾かれていた is the past perfect form of the verb: "Had been repelled" 弾かれた is the
past form of the verb "Had repelled"
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-22T09:22:15.947
21403
2015-01-22T09:22:15.947
9211
21402
answer
It is the speaker's (or author's) _**temporal viewpoint**_ that makes the
difference in the tense choices. More specifically in this case, it is a
question of whether one's temporal viewpoint is on the present moment or a
time in the past.

_**Past tense passive voice**_ for a present viewpoint:

> 「[俺]{おれ}の[一撃]{いちげき}は、[彼]{かれ}のもう[一本]{いっぽん}の[剣]{つるぎ}にギリギリで[弾]{はじ}かれ **た** 。」
>
> "My shot _**was**_ just barely _**repelled**_ by his other sword."

_**Past perfect passive voice**_ for a past viewpoint:

> 「俺の一撃は、彼のもう一本の剣にギリギリで弾かれ **ていた** 。」
>
> "My shot _**had**_ just barely _**been repelled**_ by his other sword."

It would not be very productive to discuss how important the difference is in
nuance when all we have is a single sentence. Generally speaking, the
difference in nuance would tend to be relatively minimal unless the larger
context proves otherwise.

If the other sentences immediately before or after this sentence were in the
pluperfect as well, it would be fairly strange to write this one in the plain
past tense.

It is all about the flow.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-22T11:05:46.040
21404
2015-01-22T11:20:48.730
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
21402
answer