which of these two sentences would be correct? [on hold] The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAre these garden path sentences grammatically correct?Which of these two sentences seems more acceptable?Which of these two sentences is correct (“processes” vs. “process”)?What's wrong with these sentences?“I said I would/will go” — which one is correct?Which of the following sentences are correct?“I would like to ask you that have you”Are these sentences considered grammatical?Are these sentences grammatically correct? (the usage of “everything”)Question about causative sentences
Is HostGator storing my password in plaintext?
Apart from "berlinern", do any other German dialects have a corresponding verb?
Monthly twice production release for my software project
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
Anatomically Correct Strange Women In Ponds Distributing Swords
How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?
How to draw dotted circle in Inkscape?
How do you know when two objects are so called entangled?
Can we say or write : "No, it'sn't"?
Why didn't Theresa May consult with Parliament before negotiating a deal with the EU?
Why do airplanes bank sharply to the right after air-to-air refueling?
What is the purpose of the Evocation wizard's Potent Cantrip feature?
Opposite of a diet
Keeping you safe
How to safely derail a train during transit?
Science fiction short story involving a paper written by a schizophrenic
On model categories where every object is bifibrant
Does it take more energy to get to Venus or to Mars?
Reducing Exact Cover to Subset Sum in practise!
How to subset dataframe based on a "not equal to" criteria applied to a large number of columns?
How to get regions to plot as graphics
How to start emacs in "nothing" mode (`fundamental-mode`)
Title page not generated
How do I go from 300 unfinished/half written blog posts, to published posts?
which of these two sentences would be correct? [on hold]
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAre these garden path sentences grammatically correct?Which of these two sentences seems more acceptable?Which of these two sentences is correct (“processes” vs. “process”)?What's wrong with these sentences?“I said I would/will go” — which one is correct?Which of the following sentences are correct?“I would like to ask you that have you”Are these sentences considered grammatical?Are these sentences grammatically correct? (the usage of “everything”)Question about causative sentences
I thought you said you are Michael Jordan.
Or would the correct form be:
I thought you said you were Michael Jordan.
grammaticality
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ Mar 24 at 16:05
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist
add a comment |
I thought you said you are Michael Jordan.
Or would the correct form be:
I thought you said you were Michael Jordan.
grammaticality
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ Mar 24 at 16:05
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist
add a comment |
I thought you said you are Michael Jordan.
Or would the correct form be:
I thought you said you were Michael Jordan.
grammaticality
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
I thought you said you are Michael Jordan.
Or would the correct form be:
I thought you said you were Michael Jordan.
grammaticality
grammaticality
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
61
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ Mar 24 at 16:05
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ Mar 24 at 16:05
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you’ve done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Both are grammatical in my dialect of American English, however, I would use them in different contexts. "are" would be used in a direct, factual context perhaps challenging someone on the phone or perhaps challenging someone who just stated that he was Michael Jordan but doesn't look like the famous Michael Jordan. "were" would be used if I weren't certain that I heard the person correctly, or if I were verifying that I heard the person correctly. I have heard people in casual speech contexts use both, in both senses, but the "were" version is rarer, and more likely to be used by someone familiar with the rarely-used subjunctive in English. Whit
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
add a comment |
Grammatically-speaking this is a reported speech case, so it should be "were" as the verb gets "back-shifted" in time. This is a good article which should help you explore reported speech. The chain of events is this:
Speaker A says, "I am Michael Jordan." However, later, we find out this is not the case. Speaker B then challenges A, "I thought you said you were Michael Jordan."
On the printed page, we can actually quote the speaker, and indicate this by using quotation marks: "I thought you said, "I am Michael Jordan."" In your example, you use "you" and not "I." When we speak, we have the option of either directly quoting or using reported speech.
Here's an example:
Speaker A: "I like vanilla ice cream."
Speaker B: "He said he liked vanilla ice cream." (reported speech) or "He said, "I like vanilla ice cream."" (direct quote)
The amount of time that transpires between speaking and reporting is important. For example:
Waiter: What kind of ice cream does your friend want?"
Mike: What kind of ice cream do you want?
Jack: I want pistachio.
Mike: He said he wants pistachio.
In everyday situations back shifting would cause confusion, so we change the language to convey a current desire. This situation may seem artificial, but when translating languages in real time, this happens often.
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Both are grammatical in my dialect of American English, however, I would use them in different contexts. "are" would be used in a direct, factual context perhaps challenging someone on the phone or perhaps challenging someone who just stated that he was Michael Jordan but doesn't look like the famous Michael Jordan. "were" would be used if I weren't certain that I heard the person correctly, or if I were verifying that I heard the person correctly. I have heard people in casual speech contexts use both, in both senses, but the "were" version is rarer, and more likely to be used by someone familiar with the rarely-used subjunctive in English. Whit
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
add a comment |
Both are grammatical in my dialect of American English, however, I would use them in different contexts. "are" would be used in a direct, factual context perhaps challenging someone on the phone or perhaps challenging someone who just stated that he was Michael Jordan but doesn't look like the famous Michael Jordan. "were" would be used if I weren't certain that I heard the person correctly, or if I were verifying that I heard the person correctly. I have heard people in casual speech contexts use both, in both senses, but the "were" version is rarer, and more likely to be used by someone familiar with the rarely-used subjunctive in English. Whit
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
add a comment |
Both are grammatical in my dialect of American English, however, I would use them in different contexts. "are" would be used in a direct, factual context perhaps challenging someone on the phone or perhaps challenging someone who just stated that he was Michael Jordan but doesn't look like the famous Michael Jordan. "were" would be used if I weren't certain that I heard the person correctly, or if I were verifying that I heard the person correctly. I have heard people in casual speech contexts use both, in both senses, but the "were" version is rarer, and more likely to be used by someone familiar with the rarely-used subjunctive in English. Whit
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
Both are grammatical in my dialect of American English, however, I would use them in different contexts. "are" would be used in a direct, factual context perhaps challenging someone on the phone or perhaps challenging someone who just stated that he was Michael Jordan but doesn't look like the famous Michael Jordan. "were" would be used if I weren't certain that I heard the person correctly, or if I were verifying that I heard the person correctly. I have heard people in casual speech contexts use both, in both senses, but the "were" version is rarer, and more likely to be used by someone familiar with the rarely-used subjunctive in English. Whit
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
1
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
add a comment |
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
Thanks, Whit! +1
– stephen delgado
Mar 20 at 23:55
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
For what it's worth, I use were more often than not. The subjunctive is something I find natural. I recognize I may be in the minority.
– Jason Bassford
Mar 21 at 5:00
add a comment |
Grammatically-speaking this is a reported speech case, so it should be "were" as the verb gets "back-shifted" in time. This is a good article which should help you explore reported speech. The chain of events is this:
Speaker A says, "I am Michael Jordan." However, later, we find out this is not the case. Speaker B then challenges A, "I thought you said you were Michael Jordan."
On the printed page, we can actually quote the speaker, and indicate this by using quotation marks: "I thought you said, "I am Michael Jordan."" In your example, you use "you" and not "I." When we speak, we have the option of either directly quoting or using reported speech.
Here's an example:
Speaker A: "I like vanilla ice cream."
Speaker B: "He said he liked vanilla ice cream." (reported speech) or "He said, "I like vanilla ice cream."" (direct quote)
The amount of time that transpires between speaking and reporting is important. For example:
Waiter: What kind of ice cream does your friend want?"
Mike: What kind of ice cream do you want?
Jack: I want pistachio.
Mike: He said he wants pistachio.
In everyday situations back shifting would cause confusion, so we change the language to convey a current desire. This situation may seem artificial, but when translating languages in real time, this happens often.
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
add a comment |
Grammatically-speaking this is a reported speech case, so it should be "were" as the verb gets "back-shifted" in time. This is a good article which should help you explore reported speech. The chain of events is this:
Speaker A says, "I am Michael Jordan." However, later, we find out this is not the case. Speaker B then challenges A, "I thought you said you were Michael Jordan."
On the printed page, we can actually quote the speaker, and indicate this by using quotation marks: "I thought you said, "I am Michael Jordan."" In your example, you use "you" and not "I." When we speak, we have the option of either directly quoting or using reported speech.
Here's an example:
Speaker A: "I like vanilla ice cream."
Speaker B: "He said he liked vanilla ice cream." (reported speech) or "He said, "I like vanilla ice cream."" (direct quote)
The amount of time that transpires between speaking and reporting is important. For example:
Waiter: What kind of ice cream does your friend want?"
Mike: What kind of ice cream do you want?
Jack: I want pistachio.
Mike: He said he wants pistachio.
In everyday situations back shifting would cause confusion, so we change the language to convey a current desire. This situation may seem artificial, but when translating languages in real time, this happens often.
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
add a comment |
Grammatically-speaking this is a reported speech case, so it should be "were" as the verb gets "back-shifted" in time. This is a good article which should help you explore reported speech. The chain of events is this:
Speaker A says, "I am Michael Jordan." However, later, we find out this is not the case. Speaker B then challenges A, "I thought you said you were Michael Jordan."
On the printed page, we can actually quote the speaker, and indicate this by using quotation marks: "I thought you said, "I am Michael Jordan."" In your example, you use "you" and not "I." When we speak, we have the option of either directly quoting or using reported speech.
Here's an example:
Speaker A: "I like vanilla ice cream."
Speaker B: "He said he liked vanilla ice cream." (reported speech) or "He said, "I like vanilla ice cream."" (direct quote)
The amount of time that transpires between speaking and reporting is important. For example:
Waiter: What kind of ice cream does your friend want?"
Mike: What kind of ice cream do you want?
Jack: I want pistachio.
Mike: He said he wants pistachio.
In everyday situations back shifting would cause confusion, so we change the language to convey a current desire. This situation may seem artificial, but when translating languages in real time, this happens often.
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
Grammatically-speaking this is a reported speech case, so it should be "were" as the verb gets "back-shifted" in time. This is a good article which should help you explore reported speech. The chain of events is this:
Speaker A says, "I am Michael Jordan." However, later, we find out this is not the case. Speaker B then challenges A, "I thought you said you were Michael Jordan."
On the printed page, we can actually quote the speaker, and indicate this by using quotation marks: "I thought you said, "I am Michael Jordan."" In your example, you use "you" and not "I." When we speak, we have the option of either directly quoting or using reported speech.
Here's an example:
Speaker A: "I like vanilla ice cream."
Speaker B: "He said he liked vanilla ice cream." (reported speech) or "He said, "I like vanilla ice cream."" (direct quote)
The amount of time that transpires between speaking and reporting is important. For example:
Waiter: What kind of ice cream does your friend want?"
Mike: What kind of ice cream do you want?
Jack: I want pistachio.
Mike: He said he wants pistachio.
In everyday situations back shifting would cause confusion, so we change the language to convey a current desire. This situation may seem artificial, but when translating languages in real time, this happens often.
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,77342147
5,77342147
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
add a comment |
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
I was not able to find a source for this (maybe another reader can), but confusion in reported speech is not an unusual thing. Qadaffi, in 2011, said "I am loved by the people." When the BBC reported this, they had a choice of either quoting him directly, or using back shifting. They choose back shifting (Qadaffi said he was loved by the people) because it weakened Qadaffi's position; it gave the impression that he was not currently loved by the people.
– michael_timofeev
Mar 21 at 6:39
add a comment |
