Hello to all,
Thanks for reading my post.
Reasoning:
The rule on reported speech says that if the reporting verb is in the past tense (in this case, 'promised'), then the past equivalent of all tenses should be used when one is reporting (will => would; arrives => arrived):
Original words: 'I will let you know when John arrives.'
Reported speech: 'He promised that he would let me know when John arrived.'
However, I've seen and heard this rule broken on numerous occassions. The speaker breaks the rule when he/she wants to emphasize that the words being reported are relevant to present or future time. On the other hand, I have noticed that this rule tends to be broken only with certain types of verbs such as [group #1] said, told, announced, promised, etc., whereas verbs such as [group #2] thought, saw, felt, realized, knew, hoped, etc., are followed by the past tense in reported speech.
There is a significant difference between the two above mentioned groups:
Verbs in group #1 imply that the speaker reports some information that was earlier made known to others by the speaker or another person (words were spoken).
Verbs in group #2 imply that a mental process occurred in a person's mind. The information related to that process was unknown to anyone but the person in whose mind that process occurred (no words were spoken).
Sample sentences:
Let's consider two verbs 'told' [group #1] and 'knew' [group #2]:
1. John told us yesterday that he will call us when he arrives today.
2. John told us yesterday that he would call us when he arrived today.
3. We knew yesterday that John will call us when he arrives today.
4. We knew yesterday that John would call us when he arrived today.
Conclusion:
Sentence #3 is unacceptable, while the rest of the sentences are acceptable English usage. Sentences #2 and #4 should be used in formal speech and writing. Sentence #1 is acceptable in casual conversation.
I have asked a lot of native speakers for their opinion on this. AE speakers feel pretty comfortable breaking the rule for indirect speech with verbs in group #1, whereas BE speakers tend not to break it. As for group #2, both AE and BE speakers use past tense forms in reported speech after the verbs that belong to this group.
Question:
Does anyone share the same view regarding this observation, or is it just me?
Thanks a lot for any comments, corrections or suggestions!
Regards,
JJXR
Thanks for reading my post.
Reasoning:
The rule on reported speech says that if the reporting verb is in the past tense (in this case, 'promised'), then the past equivalent of all tenses should be used when one is reporting (will => would; arrives => arrived):
Original words: 'I will let you know when John arrives.'
Reported speech: 'He promised that he would let me know when John arrived.'
However, I've seen and heard this rule broken on numerous occassions. The speaker breaks the rule when he/she wants to emphasize that the words being reported are relevant to present or future time. On the other hand, I have noticed that this rule tends to be broken only with certain types of verbs such as [group #1] said, told, announced, promised, etc., whereas verbs such as [group #2] thought, saw, felt, realized, knew, hoped, etc., are followed by the past tense in reported speech.
There is a significant difference between the two above mentioned groups:
Verbs in group #1 imply that the speaker reports some information that was earlier made known to others by the speaker or another person (words were spoken).
Verbs in group #2 imply that a mental process occurred in a person's mind. The information related to that process was unknown to anyone but the person in whose mind that process occurred (no words were spoken).
Sample sentences:
Let's consider two verbs 'told' [group #1] and 'knew' [group #2]:
1. John told us yesterday that he will call us when he arrives today.
2. John told us yesterday that he would call us when he arrived today.
3. We knew yesterday that John will call us when he arrives today.
4. We knew yesterday that John would call us when he arrived today.
Conclusion:
Sentence #3 is unacceptable, while the rest of the sentences are acceptable English usage. Sentences #2 and #4 should be used in formal speech and writing. Sentence #1 is acceptable in casual conversation.
I have asked a lot of native speakers for their opinion on this. AE speakers feel pretty comfortable breaking the rule for indirect speech with verbs in group #1, whereas BE speakers tend not to break it. As for group #2, both AE and BE speakers use past tense forms in reported speech after the verbs that belong to this group.
Question:
Does anyone share the same view regarding this observation, or is it just me?
Thanks a lot for any comments, corrections or suggestions!
Regards,
JJXR