It is said that

Question

Which option should I choose for the blank below? According to the question maker, only one option is correct here.

It is said that the government ____ on a new regulation.

a- has been working
b- had been working
c- would have been working
d- was working

I would choose A but I'm not sure why others are wrong in this context.

Thank you all.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

AnonymousI would choose A

So would I.

It is said ... has been working .... Matching tenses.

It is said ... had been .... No match.
It is said ... would have been ... No match. Also, the conditional nature of "would have been" makes us think there should be an if-clause somewhere, and there is none.
It is said ... was .... No match.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you CalifJim.

Teillu · Answer

Excuse me, CJ;

what do you mean with "matching" or "no matching" tenses? What's the rule that says if they match or no...? I mean: is the sentence below incorrect:

This one is the book he was looking for.

because This IS ... WAS... don't match?

I'm a little confused about your previous explanation, so further info would be great for beginners like me

Thank you in advance, and glad to see people helping one another!!!

CalifJim · Answer

TeilluWhat's the rule that says if they match or no...? I mean: is the sentence below incorrect:This one is the book he was looking for.because This IS ... WAS... don't match?

I don't think I could explain the "rule" in any detail because it's not really a rule, but more of a guideline.

There are cases where it makes sense to match tenses, and there are cases where the tenses really have to be different. The example you gave is fine with the tenses you used. That's because This is the book refers to a book that the speaker probably has in his hand (or nearby) at the time he utters the sentence, but was looking for takes place in the past. Obviously, from the situation itself, the book was lost or misplaced and someone was looking for it in the past. Once the book is found it is now here. The same applies to sentences like:

Some of the concepts that I didn't understand as a child now make a lot of sense to me.

In these sentences, part or all of the meaning of the sentence has to do with a contrast between two time periods. In these cases you cannot match tenses without destroying the meaning.

In the original sentence presented at the top of this thread, there is no intent to contrast time periods, so the use of verbs that suggest different time periods obscures the intended meaning. At least there is no reason to imagine such complexities when answering an exam question, even if you can be creative and imagine special cases where different tenses might be used.

In general, matching tenses occurs between an introductory main clause (I think (that), It is said (that), I knew (that), ...) and the accompanying "content clause" (a that-clause where that is not the beginning of a relative clause).

CJ

Teillu · Answer

Thanks for your fast and extended explanation, CJ.

As I can understand, you referred to "time matching" tenses; so if I speak about things happening in the past, I might use past tenses; future tenses for future actions, and so on. It makes sense.

Thanks again!!!

Also, TodayILearned "utter" for "pronounce"!

It is said that

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions