Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I know that generally, in reported speech e.g. tomorrow shifts to "the following day". But I also know that in some cases it can remain, e.g:

He said he would do that tomorrow.

That one should be correct if I say that on the same day (tomorrow has not begun) but he e.g. changed his mind and I know this is not gonna happen.

But can it be also with another expression of future?

He said he was coming home the next week.

Can it be correct? E.g. he says that and dies the same day in the car accident. So would be correct to keep "next week" in this reported speech, because it is still the future?

share|improve this question
1  
the next day and the week after are perhaps what you are looking for –  mplungjan Jul 18 '13 at 8:44
    
I am asking whether the construction is possible when the content of reported speech is still a future (has not happened yet), not sure how your comment relates to that. –  user970696 Jul 18 '13 at 8:59
1  
It looks correct to me. My suggestions could be used regardless of time they were said and regardless of when the event would actually happen –  mplungjan Jul 18 '13 at 9:02
    
@mplungjan is correct. Although I would use "the following week" instead of "the week after". –  moonstar2001 Jul 18 '13 at 9:20
    
I would be happier with "would be coming home the next week* or possibly would come home the next week, but that doesn't affect the question asked. –  TimLymington Jul 18 '13 at 17:10
add comment

2 Answers

The same rules applies to other time adverbials as applies to tomorrow:

Rule 1: If the time referred to is still in the future, you don't need to change the adverbial.

Rule 2: If the time referred to has started but not finished, change the adverbial (usually to include this).

Rule 3: If the time referred to has finished, change the adverbial (usually to include the definite article).

Here are two examples. A. Imagine a son telling his mother on Friday: "I'm coming home tomorrow!" (Saturday) and the mother reporting this to her husband.

She tells her husband on Friday: Rule 1 - "Mark said he's coming home tomorrow!"

She tells her husband early on Saturday: Rule 2 - "Mark said he's coming home today!"

She tells her husband a month later. (Her son had changed his mind on Friday evening): Rule 3 - "Mark said he was coming home the next day."

B. Imagine Mark says to his girlfriend Susan in 2012: "Let's get married next year!" and Susan reports this to her parents.

She tells her parents in 2012: Rule 1 - "Mark suggested that we get married next year."

She tells her parents at the beginning of 2012: Rule 2 - "Mark suggested that we get married this year."

She tells her parents many years later: Rule 3 - "Mark suggested that we got married the following year (but then he met someone else!)"

share|improve this answer
    
I cried a little reading the last sentence :*( I'm sure Susan will find a better man in the year(s) to come! –  Mari-Lou A Jul 18 '13 at 9:50
2  
@Mary-Lou. Well, at least she didn't die as in the OP's example! –  Shoe Jul 18 '13 at 9:59
3  
In your final example get should not be backshifted: it's a subjunctive clause which elicits the bare infinitive form. –  StoneyB Jul 18 '13 at 10:09
    
@StoneyB. The backshift sounds fine to me, a British native speaker. I suspect that it is more likely to trouble American native speakers. –  Shoe Jul 18 '13 at 10:29
    
I understand that BE doesn't demand the "mandative subjunctive", but that's really only an issue with be and with 3d-person-singular forms, and that we got implies an event prior to the suggestion: "My sister suggested that we got married in 1989, but I corrected her." The ordinary evasion of subjunctive is a construction with should: "Mark suggested that we should get married the following year". You certainly would not backshift that to "Mark suggested that we should have got married ...*. –  StoneyB Jul 18 '13 at 10:49
show 1 more comment

I agree with @Shoe's analysis as regards your first example:

He said he would do that tomorrow.

This refers to whichever day is "tomorrow" at the time you make the statement, and irrespective of the day on which "he said" it. For example:
"He" said it on Monday; you spoke the sentence on Thursday = He will be "doing it" on Friday.

As regards your second example:

He said he was coming home the next week.

Because of the word "the" in "the next week", I understand this to be referring to the week immediately following the week in which he said that, irrespective of when you made the statement. For example:
"He" said it in week 1; he [then] expected to be coming home in week 2; you spoke the sentence in week 3 or later.

This could alternatively, and perhaps slightly more clearly, be re-phrased as:

He said he was coming home the following week.

The use of the word following instead of next helps to remove any ambiguity that "next" may refer to "next week" relative to when you made the statement.

But, if you were to omit the word "the" in "the next week":

He said he was coming home next week.

then the analysis would be the same as for your first example: "next week" would be relative to the time you make the statement, and irrespective of when "he said" it. For example:
"He" said it in week 1; you spoke the sentence in week 3 = He will be coming home in week 4.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.