0

This question already has an answer here:

For example, "I found that LA is not an island." (Truth always)

or "I ensured them that car insurance is necessary." (Truth in past and now still)

Do I have to use "was" instead of "is" for tense agreement?

marked as duplicate by FumbleFingers, aedia λ, anongoodnurse, tchrist, Mitch Jan 5 '14 at 21:41

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 2
    No. There is no obligatory "tense agreement" in English. In both examples either is or was may be used, at the speaker's option. However, in the second example, the verb to use is assured. Not ensured, which does not take an indirect object and is therefore ungrammatical in this sentence, and doesn't mean what you want anyway (to ensure means to find out for sure, not to tell anybody anything). – John Lawler Jan 3 '14 at 17:45
  • 1
    I seem to remember some forecasting about a quake eventually tearing part of California off the mainland. So the "truth always" status of "LA is not an island" is somewhat debatable. :) – cHao Jan 3 '14 at 19:56
1

If it is still necessary, most people would default to is, but was is also correct because at the time it was necessary. The fact that it is still necessary isn't necessarily relevant. It depends on subtle context of the conversation.

  • 1
    What do you mean, "technically"? Exactly what rule is being applied to produce this judgement? – John Lawler Jan 3 '14 at 17:54
  • 2
    '...technically was is correct...' assumes that there is an obligatory "tense agreement" in English, which J Lawler said/says there isn't. As both was necessary and is necessary (at the time the speaker utters the words) make sense, tecnically both are correct here. And if the laws of the land have changed, one may be grammatically correct but a false statement. – Edwin Ashworth Jan 3 '14 at 17:56
  • @JohnLawler: It's technically correct because although people would usually default to is, was is still correct. I'm judging that based on the fact that there isn't a rule to my knowledge that invalidates the usage of was. – Jacobm001 Jan 3 '14 at 17:57
  • 1
    @Jacobm001: Sorry if my downvote seems a bit harsh! But I'm solidly behind John & Edwin here, and it seems to me your "technically was is correct" erroneously implies that "technically is is incorrect". And that bothers me. – FumbleFingers Jan 3 '14 at 18:01
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers: I have reworded for better clarification. – Jacobm001 Jan 3 '14 at 18:05

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