2

Can we say:

"Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor for almost five years at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children."

Instead of:

"Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children for almost five years."

9
  • 2
    Why do you think it would be wrong? It depends on what you want to emphasise.
    – fev
    Commented Aug 18, 2023 at 13:56
  • @fev Thanks for your comment! I thought it might be wrong because a popular online grammar checker said it was.
    – CJ2023
    Commented Aug 18, 2023 at 13:58
  • Grammar checkers are not the absolute authority... Use them to orientate yourself a bit, but at the end of the day you are the author of your statement.
    – fev
    Commented Aug 18, 2023 at 14:05
  • 1
    Either, but be aware that you'd only use the past perfect (had been) in a context that has a before/after situation set in the past. For example, I had been the hall monitor at SLESMIC for almost five years when I decided to look for a job in government. or I was looking at that time for a job in government . I had been hall monitor at a school for five years and felt it was time for a change.
    – TimR
    Commented Aug 18, 2023 at 14:10
  • @Tim Thank you so much for your comment! I was just wondering, though, if the following sentence was correct. "Before becoming a class president in 2000, I had been a hall monitor since 1995 at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children."
    – CJ2023
    Commented Aug 18, 2023 at 14:14

3 Answers 3

4

The usual order for location and duration is to put the location first. See this grammar note from Cambridge Dictionary and this web page for English language learners.

However, if the phrase giving the location is considerably longer than that giving the duration, as it is in your example, then it would generally be better to put the duration first.

How much longer does it need to be for you to put the duration first? It's a judgment call—there's no standard formula. But for your example, Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children is much longer than almost five years, so in this case, putting the duration first will lead to a more comprehensible sentence.

There are also other reasons you might want to put the duration first. For example, if the next sentence of your writing explains more about the location, then putting the location last will connect the two sentences better.

2

Both the other answers hint at this, but let me state it explicitly ...

Both sentences in the question are grammatical. Which one to prefer depends on how you intend to continue.

Choose this variant

Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor for almost five years at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children.

if you intend to start the next sentence with a mention of the school or of the children, perhaps

Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor for almost five years at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children. Musically inclined they might have been, but they were ghastly little oiks, exceeded only in ghastliness by their parents.

Choose the other variant

Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children for almost five years.

if your next sentence starts with reference to the five years, perhaps

Before I became a singer, I had been a hall monitor at the Stuart Little Elementary School for the Musically Inclined Children for almost five years. And they were the five happiest years of my life.

0

Placing it at the beginning is fine, though in your example it sounds less idiomatic. In general, the context matters. For instance, which information the author wishes to emphasize.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .