I was surprised to learn that he has written about his childhood.

[kadioguy]

[From a TOEIC test]

a. I was surprised to learn that he has written about his childhood ... .
b. I was surprised to learn that he had written about his childhood ... . [My version]
---
1. Does (b) also work and mean the same as (a) in this case?
2. Which one would you prefer to use?

 

[jutfrank]

1. No, of course not. It has a different aspect.
2. The original.

The present perfect is used because the utterance is in reference to the present moment. I imagine you're thinking it's in reference to the past moment of being surprised. That's not the case.

 

[5jj]

a. I was surprised to learn that he has written about his childhood ... .
b. I was surprised to learn that he had written about his childhood ... . [My version]
---
1. Does (b) also work and mean the same as (a) in this case?
2. Which one would you prefer to use?

I think both forms are fine.

The second is merely a (n optional) backshifting.

 

[kadioguy]

The present perfect is used because the utterance is in reference to the present moment. I imagine you're thinking it's in reference to the past moment of being surprised. That's not the case.

I think that timeline is like this:

1. James wrote a book about his childhood.
2. James went to a show on BTW Radio, promoting his new book.
3. Ogilvie heard the episode and found it very entertaining.
4. Ogilvie wrote the thank-you email.

That's why I used (b). I agree with 5jj that (b) is merely a backshifting of (a).

What do you think?

a. I was surprised to learn that he has written about his childhood ... .
b. I was surprised to learn that he had written about his childhood ... .

 

[jutfrank]

I agree with 5jj that (b) is merely a backshifting of (a).

What do you think?

I've told you what I think. I think the writer has used the present perfect for a good reason: that the utterance is in reference to the present time, not the past moment of being surprised.

This is not a case where the past perfect is needed to sequence events. The fact is that he has written about his childhood. This fact has present relevance, which I interpret to be important to the meaning of the utterance. The writer is talking about a present situation. Using the past perfect in this case would lose that present relevance, so I don't agree that using (b) is 'merely' backshifting.

 

[5jj]

I I think the writer has used the present perfect for a good reason: that the utterance is in reference to the present time, not the past moment of being surprised.

This is not a case where the past perfect is needed to sequence events. The fact is that he has written about his childhood. This fact has present relevance, which I interpret to be important to the meaning of the utterance. The writer is talking about a present situation.

I agree up to that point.

Using the past perfect in this case would lose that present relevance, so I don't agree that using (b) is 'merely' backshifting.

That's where we differ.

 

[jutfrank]

I agree up to that point.

That's where we differ.

I'm not sure where we differ, then. If you agree that the present relevance is important to the meaning of the utterance, how can it be lost?

 

[5jj]

John: I'm hungry
Fred; What did John say?
Bill: He said that he was/is hungry.

When the original idea is still relevant, then backshifting is optional. The backshifted version does not remove the present relevance.

 

[Tdol]

It is a new book.

 

[jutfrank]

The backshifted version does not remove the present relevance.

Okay, this is precisely where we disagree.