The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream

[Violetz]

Hello.

Which sentence is correct and, why?

1-The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream.

2-The brothers saw what happened to their sister in a dream.

 

[emsr2d2]

Hello. There's no need for a greeting on the forum. Just go straight in with your question.

Which sentence is correct and no comma here why?

1-The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream.
2-The brothers saw what happened to their sister in a dream.

Neither of them makes sense to me. The problem is the position of "in a dream". As it stands, it says that the brothers saw "what happened to their sister in a dream" - ie something happened to their sister in a dream. I don't think that's what you mean. I would phrase it like this:

In a dream, the brothers saw what [had] happened to their sister.

As you can see above, both the past simple and the past perfect are possible. There's a logic issue, though. It is unlikely (I would say impossible) that both brothers would have the same dream.

Don't ask us why something is correct. You can ask us why something is incorrect.

 

[Violetz]

Thank you. It is possible. In fact, the devil came to the brothers in a dream and the they saw that their sister had been killed and buried inside a ditch.

I wonder which sentence is correct

1-The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream. Past perfect.

2-The brothers saw what happened to their sister in a dream. Past simple.

 

[Skrej]

The issue isn't with the verb tenses, as both are still grammatical, and both tenses could apply to the situation at hand.

The problem is with putting 'in a dream' at the end. It makes things potentially ambiguous: Did the brothers have a dream about what actually happened to their sister, or did they somehow see what happened to her only in a dream (i.e. viewed another person's dream about their sister)? We know know it's the former, but only because you added the backstory about the devil sending the dreams.

Logically, only the first would be possible, but when you start adding supernatural elements such as devil-induced shared visions, then other options are suddenly more feasible. That's why emsr suggested rearranging the word order which removes all ambiguity. The unlikely event of two people having the same dream is still explained by it being demon-induced.

The issue of verb tense doesn't change the issue of ambiguity.

 

[emsr2d2]

Thank you. It is possible. In fact, the devil came to the brothers in a dream and the they saw that their sister had been killed and buried inside in a ditch.

I wonder which sentence is correct.

1-The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream. (Past perfect.)
2-The brothers saw what happened to their sister in a dream. (Past simple.)

Where did this context come from? You should have given us this information in post #1. It sounds like you're talking about the plot of a film or a book. If so, you must provide the source (the title and the author).

In that context, I would use the past perfect because the death and burial of their sister happened in the past, before the dream (from the point of view of the time of writing).

 

[tedmc]

I think the things that happen in a dream are meant to be current (there and then), though unreal, so the past tense is appropriate.

 

[Tdol]

Thank you. It is possible. In fact, the devil came to the brothers in a dream and the they saw that their sister had been killed and buried inside a ditch.

I wonder which sentence is correct

1-The brothers saw what had happened to their sister in a dream. Past perfect.

2-The brothers saw what happened to their sister in a dream. Past simple.

Sentences are correct in contexts. Both of these could work in the right context.

 

[Tarheel]

A suggestion. (See below.)

Bob: She was killed and buried in a ditch.
Ron: That's a sad story.
Bob: It only happened in a dream.
Ron: It's still a sad story.

 

[emsr2d2]

A suggestion. (See below.)

Bob: She was killed and buried in a ditch.
Ron: That's a sad story.
Bob: It only happened in a dream.
Ron: It's still a sad story.

This dialogue demonstrates the ambiguity I was talking about. Tarheel's take on it is that her death and burial only happened in the dream. However, as you've explained, she really was killed and buried in a ditch, and this information was revealed to her brothers in a dream.

 

[Tarheel]

My suggestion was not to use "inside" in that phrase. Instead, just say "buried in a ditch". (I was afraid that maybe I was being too subtle.)

 

[emsr2d2]

My suggestion was not to use "inside" in that phrase. Instead, just say "buried in a ditch". (I was afraid that maybe I was being too subtle.)

I'd already made that correction in post #5. Nevertheless, if your dialogue was supposed to reflect the OP's intended meaning, it has (as I said) demonstrated that you read the alternative meaning into it.