Had said ... had lived

[Tina3]

A youth who turned up in Berlin last year saying he had been staying in woods for years is a Dutch 20-year-old who was living in the Netherlands until last September, German police say.​

They say his Dutch stepmother identified him from police photos. His real name is said to be Robin.​

He called himself "Ray" and was dubbed the "forest boy" by German media.​

He had said he and his father had lived in the woods for five years, following the death of his mother in a car crash.​

"Ray" told police he had left the forest after his father died and he had buried the body.​

But officers failed to locate the remains and said they had doubts about the story.​

....................................................

​

I can't understand the following sentence.​

He had said he and his father had lived in the woods for five years, following the death of his mother in a car crash.


​

It should be one of the following:​

He said he and his father had lived in the woods for five years, following the death of his mother in a car crash.​

He had said he and his father lived in the woods for five years, following the death of his mother in a car crash.
​

I am not sure.

He said he lived in Canada. Correct
He had said he lived in Canada. Correct.
He had said he had lived in Canada. Not correct
​

 

[emsr2d2]

He had said (in the past, when he was first found) that he had lived (even further in the past, but before the time that he was found) in the woods.

 

[Tina3]

Thanks emsr2d2
You have written the following:


He had said (in the past, when he was first found) that he had lived (even further in the past, but before the time that he was found) in the woods.​

Yes, it is fine to write ‘he had lived in the forest for 5 years’.

I can’t understand the reason for writing ‘He had said’.

The man told the story some weeks ago.

In the past he lived in the woods.

Today we want to tell about this; so it is correct to write ‘ he said he and his father had lived in the forest for 5 years after the death of his mother’.
When writing a past perfect sentence, there should be 2 past items.
It is incorrect to write ‘ he had said he and his father had lived in the forest for 5 years after the death of his mother’.

 

[Tdol]

He had said implies that he has since changed what he says- it's not longer true.

 

[Tina3]

Tdol
I can't understand your reply.

 

[emsr2d2]

"Initially, when he was found, he had said that he had lived in the forest for many years with his father. He now says that he only lived there for four weeks." He has changed his story. He had said one thing, now he says another. He had said one thing, then he said another.

 

[Tina3]

Does this mean the sentence has nothing to do with past perfect?
I look at it the way we write past perfect sentences.

 

[Tdol]

No it doesn't- the past perfect is there for a reason. One thing the past perfect can show is how things have changed. The past perfect is not simply about the first of two actions- often, the first of two will be in the simple past. Here, it is the first of two versions of the same story, so the importance of the change of story is shown through the past perfect.

 

[Tina3]

My husband and I are surprised to learn this.
I had lived in Canada. This is wrong.
It should always be I lived in Canada.

He had lived in Canada for about 2 years before he moved to the USA. Correct.

In the original question, 'he had said ... and 'he had lived ... have nothing to do with past perfect.

 

[bhaisahab]

"He had said he and his father had lived in the woods for five years, following the death of his mother in a car crash."
If there was evidence that after having said that he lived with his father in the woods for five years he said something to contradict that, the above would be correct. I can see no evidence of that in the text you provided, therefore I would say that the past pefect is wrong in that context.

 

[Barb_D]

What about the simply tense shifting in reported speech?

"I lived in the forest," said the boy.
The boy said that he had lived in the forest.


On Tuesdy, the boy said "I lived in the forest."
On Thursday, the boy said "Not really. I lived in the city."

The boy HAD said (before he said something different, more recently but also in the past) that he had lived (backshift of reported speech) in the forest.

 

[Tina3]

Thanks
Barb_D wrote some clear sentences.
I have no difficulty in understanding them.


The boy said that he had lived in the forest.
I believe the conjunction 'that' is optional in the above. It is a past perfect sentence.

 

[5jj]

The boy said that he had lived in the forest.
I believe the conjunction 'that' is optional in the above. It is a past perfect sentence.

That is optional, but that is nothing to do with the past perfect.

 

[Barb_D]

The "that" is indeed optional but emphasizes that the speech is reported and not direct.