0
Marix998 Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

Papandreou and Samaras had been/were scrambling to reach a deal before finance ministers of euro countries meet/have met in Brussels on Monday evening

Hello,

I have read an article on reuters.com and I did not understand why the past perfect was used in this sentece/paragraph:

Papandreou and Samaras had been scrambling to reach a deal before finance ministers of euro countries meet in Brussels on Monday evening, to show that Greece is serious about taking steps needed to stave off bankruptcy.

(http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/07/us-greece-idUSL6E7M601O20111107)

Could it be used were instead of had been? It is interesting that after past perfect is used simple present (meet) to express the future. Would it be correct to use have met instead of meet to express future?

Papandreou and Samaras were scrambling to reach a deal before finance ministers of euro countries meet/have met in Brussels on Monday evening, to show that Greece is serious about taking steps needed to stave off bankruptcy.

Papandreou and Samaras had been scrambling to reach a deal before finance ministers of euro countries meet/have met in Brussels on Monday evening, to show that Greece is serious about taking steps needed to stave off bankruptcy.

Thanks

M
  

Top answer

marix998 Could they have used were instead of had been? No. If you read the article you will see that an agreement was reached sometime Sunday evening, therefore "had been" is correct.

— MalRey

  • marix998 Could they have used were instead of had been?
  • No.
  • If you read the article you will see that an agreement was reached sometime Sunday evening, therefore "had been" is correct.
  • If they were still scrambling at the time the article was written then "have been" would be correct.
  • marix998 Would it be correct to use have met instead of meet to express future?
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

4 Answers
0
marix998Could they have used were instead of had been?
No. If you read the article you will see that an agreement was reached sometime Sunday evening, therefore "had been" is correct. If they were still scrambling at the time the article was written then "have been" would be correct.
marix998Would it
0
0
MalRey
marix998Could they have used were instead of had been?
No. If you read the article you will see that an agreement was reached sometime Sunday evening, therefore "had been" is correct. If they were still scrambling at the time the article was written then "have been" would be correct.
marix998Would it be co
0
0
marix998I just want to know when (at which occasion) it would be correct to use were instead of had been...
The way the article is written you really can't use "were."

Here is a proposed rewording that I'm not not happy with but that uses "were" correctly. I haven't looked in detail but I doubt that it fits with the context of the story after this mo
0
0
MalRey
marix998I just want to know when (at which occasion) it would be correct to use were instead of had been...
The way the article is written you really can't use "were."Here is a proposed rewording that I'm not not happy with but that uses "were" correctly. I haven't looked in detail but I doubt that it fits with the context of th
0

Related Questions