temporary vs permanent truth

Question

Please advise me on this - Imagine, A and B are two friends.
A says to B : "You go to Sam's room and see if Sam's sleeping." B : "Okay" B leaves and find that Sam's room is closed. 5 minutes later B returns and tells A about Sam room.
A: Did you go there ?
B: Yes I went there and I found that Sam's room is closed.

Is 'is' possible in the above sentence given the fact that B knows that Sam's room is still closed at the time of speaking to A. ?

P.S. If the sentence were like -
He found that he lives in England.
He found that sky is blue.

In these examples I'm aware that present tense can be used because its an permanent action. (Living in England is permanent and sky is and always be blue)

But in the sentence "I found that Sam's room is closed." Here Sam's room will not be always closed , probably it will be opened after few hours, few days. So its a temporary action. And by this logic "is" seems incorrect. But at the time of speaking of speaking to A, Sam's room is still closed and B knows it for a fact. And by this logic "is" seems correct.

I'm lost. What would be your advise on it.

Thank You Awaiting your reply

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

A says to B : "You go to Sam's room and see if Sam's sleeping." B : "Okay" B leaves and finds that Sam's room is closed. 5 minutes later B returns and tells A about Sam's room.
A: Did you go there ?
B: Yes I went there and I found that Sam's room is closed.

Well, B did not do what A asked. A asked if Sam was sleeping, not if his room was closed or open.
Rooms are not usually open or closed. The door is.

An open/closed room is an architectural style, and will not change until the remodeler's are commissioned to rebuild it.
So the present tense here is fine.

If you change it to
B: Yes I went there and I found that Sam's door is closed.

That is fine, at least in the immediate time frame after the visit to Sam's room.
After some reasonable time has passed after the visit, native speakers would use the past tense.

PS. I hope this is not another one of you indirect speech back-shifting questions that will go on ad infinitum. I thought we had beaten that dead horse to hamburger in your previous thread.

Deadrat · Answer

Ordinarily in examples like yours, you shift tense back in reported speech:

A: Did you check Sam's room?
B: I went to his room, but I found his door was closed.

You don't have to shift for enduring or continuing actions:

A: What did you learn in class?
B: I learned that the Sun revolves around the Earth.
A: I don't think you were paying much attention.

If B reports "I found his door is closed," technically the grammar indicates that B found the door closed and that he's sure it's still closed. But native speakers are unlikely to notice, especially since the exchange is likely to be the following:

A: Is Sam in his room?
B: Dunno. Door's closed.

Rom Reigns · Answer

Thanks folks for your words !

You mean to say that for non-enduring actions we cannot back shift the tense in reported speech even if the action is still continuing at the time of reporting/speaking/writing.

But the grammar only mentions that if the words are true/relevant at the time of reporting then tense back shifting is optional.
So by this logic, it looks perfectly legitimate to report like "I found that the door is closed." if the door is closed at the time of reporting to A.
Isn't it ?

Alpecca states that if reasonable time has not passed then tense can be retained.
To Alpecca,
Lets say if the reasonable time has passed , assume 2-3 hours, and even after that if the reporter believes that door is still closed (call it B's intuition) then can reporter use 'is' ?

RR

CalifJim · Answer

Rom Reignsfor non-enduring actions we cannot back shift the tense

You have not listened to a word that we've all been telling you.

It is never wrong to backshift.

Why in the world would you think you've found a case where backshifting is forbidden?
What part of "never" don't you understand?

CJ

Rom Reigns · Answer

CalifJimIt is never wrong to backshift.

Agreed that back shifting is never wrong.
But many a times I notice that people don't back shift like in the example mentioned above 'I went there and I found that the door is closed.'

Here 'is' is used. So is it correct here to use 'is' under the condition that at the time of speaking to A, B knows that door is still closed ?

P.S. If the sentence were like -
I found that he lives in NY.
I found that his room lies next to bathroom.
In these examples I'm aware that the present tense can be used because its a permanent action. (Living in NYis permanent and his room is and probably will always be next to bathroom.)

But in the sentence "I found that Sam's room is closed." Here room is closed at the time B speaks to A but will be opened later and 'not closed forever'. So its a temporary action. And by this logic "is" seems incorrect.
But at the time of speaking to A, Sam's room is still closed and B knows it for a fact. And by this logic "is" seems correct.

Hence lost.

Fivejedjon · Answer

Your endless series of posts on this topic are wasting people's time. This thread is now locked. Any further posts on the topic that you may submit will be deleted.

temporary vs permanent truth

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions