which of these two sentences would be correct? [on hold]
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
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ 2 days ago
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
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
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
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ 2 days ago
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
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
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
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
asked Mar 20 at 23:31
stephen delgadostephen delgado
61
61
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
stephen delgado is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ 2 days ago
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
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as off-topic by Hellion, TaliesinMerlin, JJJ, tchrist♦ 2 days ago
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
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
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
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
5,76642147
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
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
answered Mar 20 at 23:44
WhitWhit
1
1
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Whit is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
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
5,76642147
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
5,76642147
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
5,76642147
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
5,76642147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,76642147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,76642147
answered Mar 21 at 6:30
michael_timofeevmichael_timofeev
5,76642147
5,76642147
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 |
