Sequence of Tenses

   Share on Facebook  
Anonymous  #338258  Mon, 12 Mar 07 04:46 AM

I am a bit confused at the use of either the simple past or the simple present after the main clause in the simple past in those instances when the subordinate clause does not denote the universal truth but some kind of continuous state or habitual action. When you google for such examples you get both variants. Here are some instances, off the top of my head:

She told him that the train usually arrived at 6 o'clock.

She told him that the train usually arrives at 6 o'clock.

She told him she liked ice-cream.

She told him she likes ice-cream.

She told him she believed in God.

She told him she believes in God.

She told him Oasis was her favourite group.

She told him Oasis is her favourite group.

If the subordinate clause refers to the time before that of the main clause, it should be the past perfect, right? I am not sure anymore with all the controversial examples I come across.

  
Mister Micawber  #338260  Mon, 12 Mar 07 05:05 AM

In all the cases you present, the writer has the choice of present or past simple in the reported clause, because the statements all still hold true at the moment:  she believed in God when she told him, and she believes in God today (that is the necessary logical assumption, of course)

None of those calls for the past perfect; this one does:   She told him she had believed in God until that moment.

  
Top 10 Contributor
Joined on Wed, Aug 4 2004
Yokohama
Veteran Member (21,223)
SystemAdministratorTeachers
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master-- that's all.'
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL General English Grammar Questions
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service