past perfect

[Hanka]

Hello,

could you please tell me which tense is correct in the following sentence:

The tax administrator complied with our request for registration from March 1, 2005, although the request for registration was made/has been made only in April 2006.

I think the past perfect should be correct, because they made a request first and then the tax administrator complied with the request.

Thank you very much.

Hanka

[Fazzu]

I think you are right there.

[Volcano1985]

Past Perfect

[riverkid]

Hello,
could you please tell me which tense is correct in the following sentence:
The tax administrator complied with our request for registration from March 1, 2005, although the request for registration was made/has been made only in April 2006.
I think the past perfect should be correct, because they made a request first and then the tax administrator complied with the request.
Thank you very much.
Hanka

"has been made" does not work here, Hanka. As to 'was made' or 'had been made', either would work. ENLs are not compelled to use the past perfect in every situation where it is possible.

[Coffa]

Hello,
could you please tell me which tense is correct in the following sentence:
The tax administrator complied with our request for registration from March 1, 2005, although the request for registration was made/has been made only in April 2006.
I think the past perfect should be correct, because they made a request first and then the tax administrator complied with the request.
Thank you very much.
Hanka

The imperfect past 'was made' carries no implications about a sequence of events either way - it simply denotes that the action occurred in the past. It is thus OK to use it. The pluperfect (past perfect) tense 'had been made' is also OK, but it is not mandatory - you would typically use it only if you felt it necessary to make clear that the compliance occurred after the request. As the context makes this implicit, there is no need to use the tense.

[riverkid]

The imperfect past 'was made' carries no implications about a sequence of events either way - it simply denotes that the action occurred in the past. It is thus OK to use it. The pluperfect (past perfect) tense 'had been made' is also OK, but it is not mandatory - you would typically use it only if you felt it necessary to make clear that the compliance occurred after the request. As the context makes this implicit, there is no need to use the tense.

Since we can use the past perfect, Coffa, doesn't that lead us to the inescapable conclusion think that there could be more to the past perfect than the "one action before another" rule suggests.

[Coffa]

Since we can use the past perfect, Coffa, doesn't that lead us to the inescapable conclusion think that there could be more to the past perfect than the "one action before another" rule suggests.

I am unsure what your point is here, Riverkid. What 'more' are you referring to? The request was made before the compliance was granted, and both were in the past, hence the past perfect is legitimate. The simple past is also legitimate because the past perfect is a subset of past events in this context.