before the swimming pool (is/has been/was) built

[EdisonBhola]

Hi all,

I found the following question in a grammar book:

Before the swimming pool ______ , people had to swim in the sea.

A) is built
B) has been built
C) was built

According to the model answer, "was built" is correct. But I wonder if "has been built" is also acceptable. "Has been built" stresses that the building of the pool is over and the time of which is not stated.

Am I right?

 

[reno33]

No, you're not right. The correct answer is "was built. Your analysis of why "has been built" is the correct answer also applies to "was built" so it is not a legitimate explanation.

The difference between was written/has been written is in the main, one of time. They both mean that the "writing" is completed. For simplicity's sake I will say that "was written" implies a distant past while "has been written" implies a more recent past.........but.....I'll admit, it is much more complicated than that.

 

[EdisonBhola]

No, you're not right. The correct answer is "was built. Your analysis of why "has been built" is the correct answer also applies to "was built" so it is not a legitimate explanation.

The difference between was written/has been written is in the main, one of time. They both mean that the "writing" is completed. For simplicity's sake I will say that "was written" implies a distant past while "has been written" implies a more recent past.........but.....I'll admit, it is much more complicated than that.

But what if "people had to swim" also referred to the recent past, say 3 weeks ago, and the pool was built last week? Does "has been built" work in this case?

 

[reno33]

Sorry...I don't understand your question or the situation you describe. It's very confusing.

 

[RM1(SS)]

But what if "people had to swim" also referred to the recent past, say 3 weeks ago, and the pool was built last week? Does "has been built" work in this case?

No.