Take the 2-minute tour ×


He didn't know that New Jersey was actually in the East Coast.

Because it still is. Or

He thought the Earth was round.

So is it square now?

Logically speaking, would you consider the use of past tense here a bit confusing in day-to-day speech in these examples? Would you instinctively opt for using the present tense?

share|improve this question
Here are two posts on the topic of backshift: english.stackexchange.com/a/149167/57102 , english.stackexchange.com/a/150743/57102 , which might be helpful. –  F.E. May 18 at 21:49

5 Answers 5

up vote 8 down vote accepted

Both tenses are OK, but I believe the past tense is a bit more common: it may be somewhat contrary to logic, but it sounds better. Harmony of tenses (if that's what it's called) is a linguistic phenomenon that is not always very logical.

share|improve this answer
Harmony, agreement, sequence, succession, you name it. –  RegDwigнt Jan 5 '11 at 9:32
It's largely the invention of schoolteachers. And the fact that there are no good predictive rules to share, as well as the frequent occurrence of clueless questions like this (and the more recent one that links to this question) is evidence that there is no "sequence of tenses" rule in English. Otherwise one could do better than wave one's hands about it's "not always being logical". –  John Lawler Apr 19 at 19:18
@JohnLawler: I don't see why not? If there are several possible options that are as of yet hard to predict, and one of those (the past tense) is surprising and contradicts an external rule, it makes sense to use a name for the phenomenon—especially if the surprising option often seems preferable. –  Cerberus Apr 20 at 2:12
@Cerberus: There is no "external rule" to appeal to. Tenses are determined by the speaker. –  John Lawler Apr 20 at 2:45
And where is this rule inscribed? It sounds like a Gricean implicature to me, and those are subject to well-known constraints. –  John Lawler Apr 20 at 2:53

The clauses that New Jersey was actually in the East Coast and the Earth was round are known in functional grammar as 'projected clauses'. They behave in the same way as clauses that contain what is known in traditional grammar as 'reported speech'. As the authors of the ‘Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English’ explain:

Simple past tense has a special use in reported speech or thought. The original speech or thoughts may have been in present tense, but past tense is usually used for the reports . . . Notice that the circumstances may still be continuing even though past tense is used (My emphasis).

share|improve this answer

As a technical matter, he cannot have thought in the past that the Earth is round in the present (because that was in his future); he must have thought that it was round at the time. If you really wanted to refer to his belief then in the Earth's roundness now, the construction would be he thought it would be round, but this is rare in any sensible context. Luckily, the Earth still is round, so you can say either he thinks it is round, he thinks it was round or he thought it was round without offending logic, although the second would draw puzzled glances.

Not one in a hundred English speakers have analysed this, but in my circles the past tense is instinctively used; perhaps because it is in fact correct.

share|improve this answer
Did you mean, "although the first would draw puzzled... ("he thinks it was round") because the second, he thought it was round is in the OP's question and I wouldn't be puzzled by that statement. –  Mari-Lou A Jul 27 '13 at 7:23
@Mari-Lou; The second example in that sentence is he thinks it was round which, though logically valid and almost certainly true, is peculiar phrasing. –  TimLymington Jul 27 '13 at 12:29
Oh, I didn't see the first one, it's a bit lost in the field in MHO. –  Mari-Lou A Jul 27 '13 at 12:43

After "I wish" follows past tense to express an irreal wish, ie a wish that can't come true. In written language: I wish father were** here. In colloquial language this were** is replaced by was*: I wish father was* here.

were** = genuine Past subjunctive Was* = Past indicative as substitute for subjunctive.

After I thought + clause we have something similar. - We thought you were the type for the job. A Past indicative in the clause makes no sense.Only as a Past with subjunctive function the sentence makes sense.

A lot of good examples would be necessary to show this in a convincing manner.

Here's a link to BNC with 50 examples for "I thought I was ...". I think there are examples among these that show that "I was" can't be understood as a normal Past indicative.


share|improve this answer

A thought about the logic here that has a valid grammatical implication. What something was in the past tells you nothing about what it is today. For example, if I tell you I saw my daughter yesterday, and I was very happy to see her, there is no implication at all that were she to stop by today that I'd be unhappy to see her.

So, when you say "He didn't know that New Jersey was actually in the East Coast" there is no implication in the sentence as to the location of New Jersey today. it tells you neither that it is on the east coast, nor if it has switched places with California.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


