Lcchang  +  322437 Wed, 31 Jan 07 04:24 PM Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. Can I add one word so it becomes: Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss had given him a job because he's his nephew. Please advise. Lcchang Joined on Mon, Feb 27 2006 Northern Taiwan Contributing Member 1,078 Life will never end.

	Inchoateknowledge  +  322443 Wed, 31 Jan 07 04:34 PM Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss had given him a job because he's his nephew. -- correct Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. -- time sequence is clear -- correct Inchoateknowledge Joined on Wed, May 3 2006 Senior Member 2,549 Beep! Beep! :)

	Lcchang  +  322452 Wed, 31 Jan 07 04:46 PM  Inchoateknowledge wrote: Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss had given him a job because he's his nephew. -- correct Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. -- time sequence is not clear I see. My test book sucks because it says "gave" not "had given". LCChang Lcchang

	Inchoateknowledge  +  322460 Wed, 31 Jan 07 05:00 PM  Lcchang wrote: I see. My test book sucks because it says "gave" not "had given". It is not incorrect if you do not simplify tense in sub clauses. Inchoateknowledge Tenses, Clauses

	Lcchang  +  322462 Wed, 31 Jan 07 05:02 PM  Marius Hancu wrote:  Lcchang wrote: I see. My test book sucks because it says "gave" not "had given". Your book is right, IMO. ... since we learned that the boss gave him a job is a subordinate, and in subordinates the tense simplification is recommended (see Swan, Practical English Usage, Tense simplification). In this case the expected past perfect is simplified to past. As a proof, at Google, the hits are: 32 for "since the boss gave" 0  for "since the boss had given" Not only that, but the tense sentence in: Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job ... is clear, IMO. It's normal to have a moment in the past (defined by simple past) followed by an action leading to the present (described with present perfect.) I must say it's a very important view to me. I've never known rules like this before. Since "gave" here seems like in a subordinate clause (noun clause) of a subordinate clause, does that apply to the grammar rule too? LCChang Lcchang Grammar, Tenses, Clauses, Nouns, Past Perfect, Simple Past, Present Perfect

	Lcchang  +  322464 Wed, 31 Jan 07 05:05 PM  Inchoateknowledge wrote:  Lcchang wrote: I see. My test book sucks because it says "gave" not "had given". It is not incorrect if you do not simplify tense in sub clauses. Yap. Marius Hancu said the same thing to me too. Thanks. LCChang Lcchang Tenses, Clauses

	Marius Hancu  +  322500 Wed, 31 Jan 07 06:06 PM OK, I've thought a bit more about  the enclosed subordinate. I'll repost this, as the original is locked Your book is right, IMO. ... since we learned that the boss gave him a job is a subordinate, and in subordinates the tense simplification is recommended (see Swan, Practical English Usage, Tense simplification). In this case the expected past perfect is simplified to past. As a proof, at Google, the hits are: 32 for "since the boss gave" 0  for "since the boss had given" Not only that, but the tense sentence in: Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job ... is clear, IMO. It's normal to have a moment in the past (defined by simple past) followed by an action leading to the present (described with present perfect.) EDIT: My doubts wrt my original posting were caused by the fact that in: ... since we learned that the boss gave him a job we're dealing with a subordinate that the boss gave him a job nested within another subordinate since we learned I wondered if had given can be simplified to gave in this nested situation. However, I've decided that once one starts tense simplification, one should proceed with it to all levels nested within. Bottom line: I think both versions are correct. If you really want to emphasize the time sequence, don't "tense simplify." Marius Hancu Tenses, Past Perfect, Simple Past, Present Perfect

	Inchoateknowledge  +  322532 Wed, 31 Jan 07 07:42 PM Hi Marius Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. The red part is the sub-clause. Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. the pink part is the object of the verb: learned. Nobody has criticized Billy Joe since we learned that the boss gave him a job because he's his nephew. because he's his nephew: subclause in the that (noun) clause The time sequence is clear with the simple past version --  agreed. Inchoateknowledge Verbs, Clauses, Nouns, Simple Past