+0

My book (FCE Use of English) says that the tenses do not change in Reported Speech when the reported sentence contains a time clause. And then we've got an example:


"The car broke down when I was driving to work," he said.

He said that the car had broken down when he was driving to work.


yet in another example, it goes at follows:

"I was locking the car when a traffic warden turned up," she said.

She said that when she was locking a traffic warden turned up.


Can you explain why in the first example the tense changed in the first part of the sentence despite the time clause ("when") in the sentence? Would the rule be that we don't change tenses only after the time clause?

+1
Karol SilskiYet in another example, it goes at follows:
"I was locking the car when a traffic warden turned up," she said.
She said that when she was locking a traffic warden turned up.

Locking a traffic warden?

I think you need to post this again — correctly this time.

CJ

+0
Karol SilskiCan you explain why in the first example the tense changed in the first part of the sentence despite the time clause ("when") in the sentence?

Your book is wrong. Obviously the tense can change even when there's a time clause. I've never heard of such a rule.

You don't have to change the tense in that sentence, but there's no rule that says you can't. You could write this:

He said that the car broke down when he was driving to work.

CJ

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Comments  

She was locking the car when the traffic warned tuned up.

Karol Silski

She was locking the car when the traffic warned tuned up.

You have two typos there.

Try again.

Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Karol Silski

She was locking the car when the traffic warned tuned up.

It's still not correct. I think you mean this:

She said she was locking the car when the traffic warden turned up.

CJ

 CalifJim's reply was promoted to an answer.

You guys are right. I made too many typos I will just rewrite the whole thing. Sorry for your trouble.

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.

I still hold that when two things happen in the past, we use a past perfect verb to distinguish which thing happened first. I think this rule should be applied in all the cases except when two things happen at the same time. Besides, some time conjuntions like ‘when ‘marks which thing happened first.

Example (1):I changed my dress when I reached home.. can be reported without changing the tenses into past perfect ones. Here ‘when’ is equivalent to after. Otherwise the meaning expressed by the sentence above in (1) will be illogical. I mean first he reached home and then he changed his dress. Suppose we change the above as ,He said that he had changed his dress when he reached home, will be meaningless expression. What I want to say is that to change the tense or not to depends on the context and the use of time conjuntions with their specific meaning.Thanks.

panda mango 577Suppose we change the above as ,He said that he had changed his dress when he reached home, will be meaningless expression.

In any case it will be a very funny expression because men don't wear dresses.

CJ