Hi, Alexander!  Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:

 ak>   ----- Beginning of the citation -----
 ak>  The engineering firm building the bridge at Florida
 ak>  International University had ordered Thursday that the
 ak>  cables be tightened, Mr. Rubio, a Republican, said in
 ak>  a late Thursday tweet. "They were being tightened when
 ak>  it collapsed," he said.
 ak>   ----- The end of the citation -----



 AH>  According to my CANADIAN OXFORD DICTIONARY "reported
 AH>  speech" = what would have been referred to as an indirect
 AH>  quotation when I was in school.  It is somebody's account
 AH>  of what somebody else said, but the reporter is under no
 AH>  obligation to copy the words exactly & may alter verb
 AH>  tenses as s/he sees fit.

 ak>  You write "the reporter... may alter verb tenses as
 ak>  s/he sees fit."  Does it mean that he can alter the
 ak>  verb tenses "as he likes"? 


          Within reason, we accept that the reporter may alter some verb tenses
 to make them fit together with other verb tenses in his or her report.

          Years ago, for example, I read a cartoon in which Mr. Dithers told an
 employee he was fired.  His actual words were "Bumstead, you're fired!"  I
have not changed the meaning by using the past tense in my account of the
situation. Those who are familiar with the cartoon I'm referring to, BTW, will
realize Mr. Dithers often used the same words but evidently changed his mind
later....  :-)



 AH>  the desired action had not yet been carried out at the
 AH>  time & the engineering firm probably issued instructions
 AH>  to a supervisor who delegated the task to others.

 ak>  In other words the tense switching is not obligatory?


          I think it's almost certain in a case like this, because the reporter
 is telling us about an event which occurred in the past & probably doesn't
know the exact wording the engineering firm used.  I would agree that it's
common... but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's obligatory.

          Suppose I order some widgets from the XYZ Company, and I'm told "They
 should be at your door by 8:00 PM Friday."  At 9:00 PM on Friday I might say
to Dallas "The XYZ Company told me those widgets should be here by now."  I see
 no need to change the verb tense there if the widgets have not yet arrived.

          Another example:  I notice my friend Sheila sitting alone in a coffee
 shop & crying quietly.  I sit next to her & say "Hi, Sheila... what's up?" 
She answers "I was expecting [my boyfriend] to meet me here tonight, but I
think he must have forgotten."  Later she finds out he hadn't forgotten but was
 involved in an accident while en route to the coffee shop.  From that time
onward Sheila or I might say she thought he'd forgotten until she had more
information.  What a person said in the past may or may not reflect accurately
what they would say now.  If Susie said "The moon is made of green cheese"
awhile ago the situation is less clear & different people may use different
tenses to report on it.  :-)




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
 * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)