+0

The following sentence was extracted from an English book and it was confirmed a correct sentence by an English teacher. For the sentence below, I don’t understand why “was” of an auxiliary verb is used after “started” of past participle? I would like to seek someone’s assistance to explain how to simplify the following sentence to help me understand the sentence structure.

The sentence is shown below.

  1. The time that the show should have started was 19:30 but it started 45 minutes later.
+0

Think of the sentence like this.

  1. The time (that the show should have started was 19:30, but it started 45 minutes later.
  2. Do you understand now, or do you need more help?
  3. Clive
+0
  1. The time [ that the show should have started ] was 19:30, but it started 45 minutes later.

The relative clause, modifying the noun "time," is in brackets. It is not part of the main clause, whose subject is "time" and main verb is "was".

Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Comments  
Ben9108The time that the show should have started was 19:30 but it started 45 minutes later.

The time was 19:30.

There is a comma missing after "19:30".

 Clive's reply was promoted to an answer.
 AlpheccaStars's reply was promoted to an answer.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.