The truck driver was driving erratically for some time before the accident.

[Nonverbis]

Upstream Proficiency by Virginia Evans and Jenny Dooley.

Could you explain to me why "was driving"? I wrote "had been driving".

 

[jutfrank]

Perhaps you could first explain why you think had been driving is correct.

 

[Nonverbis]

From English Grammar in Use by Raymond Murphy about past perfect continuous:

Something had been happening for a perioud of time before something else.
Our game of tennis was interrupted. We'd been playing for about half an hour when it started to rain very heavily.

To my mind it suits the situation.

 

[Tarheel]

@Nonverbis Your version (had been driving) is exactly right.

 

[jutfrank]

The exercise wants you to forward shift the past perfect continuous to the past continuous.

If the policeman had been following and observing the truck driver for a time before the accident, he would report it with the past continuous. Doing so would focus on the erratic driving as an offence in itself rather than merely as explanatory background information to the accident.

 

[probus]

I don't really know the names of English trnses, but my feeling is that AmE often substitutes "was" for "had been" in such contexts. Illogical and wrong though it may be, it's very commonly used.

 

[Nonverbis]

The exercise wants you to forward shift the past perfect continuous to the past continuous.

I still can't agree with you.

The task is to convert it to the direct speech.

When the police officer reported about the accident, it had already happened.

---------driving-------------accident-------------report------------now--------------> t

That is why in my opinion we should use some kind of past perfect as we are talking about something happened before some other time in the past.

And "for some time" suggests continuous. Hence, the past perfect continous.

Just shifting mechanically will not work here, I believe.

 

[5jj]

I still can't agree with you.

The writer of the exercise agrees with jutfrank.

The task is to convert it to the direct speech.

Which is what jutfrank did.

You asked why 'was driving' was was the answer given, and jutfrank explained. Had you asked if the past perfect was also possible, you would have received a different response. I think the writer should have given both possibilities.

 

[jutfrank]

You can disagree with me if you like, Nonverbis, but remember that I explain stuff like this for a living. What you fail to understand is that the choice of whether to use the past perfect is not purely about the sequencing of events.

Yes, the author should have given both answers as possibilities.