Rotter Posted 18 years ago
Grammar
Would have to stay in Paris
Ms Bruni also said she had to record a new album.
Ms Bruni also quashed rumours that she had secretly married Mr Sarkozy.
Whirlwind romance
"I cannot take part in an official trip with the president," the former model told Liberation.
"We hadn't really planned it."
She said that although she and President Sarkozy are not yet married "it is in our plans".
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and would have to stay in Paris.
"Also for health reasons, it's not good," she said.
The president's whirlwind romance with Ms Bruni ahead of his visit to India sent officials looking into protocol manuals over how to treat his girlfriend in a country where relationships outside of marriage are still widely frowned upon.
Mr Sarkozy has been inseparable from her over the past few months and their romance has been grabbing headlines around the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and would have to stay in Paris.
I think the above sentence is flawed.
She told the newspapers that she had a new album to reord.
The above is fine.
She told the newspapers that she has a new album to reord. [This is incorrect.]
My question is on the words 'would have to stay in Paris'.
For me the words 'would have' implies a past event.
Look at the following example, please.
You went to a party yesterday and didn't ask me to follow.
If you asked I would have come with you. [This is a past event.]
She is going to work with a new album is a future event.
However, the following is fine.
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and wanted/had to stay in Paris.
I can't understand the reason for writing 'would have to stay in Paris'.
Ms Bruni also quashed rumours that she had secretly married Mr Sarkozy.
Whirlwind romance
"I cannot take part in an official trip with the president," the former model told Liberation.
"We hadn't really planned it."
She said that although she and President Sarkozy are not yet married "it is in our plans".
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and would have to stay in Paris.
"Also for health reasons, it's not good," she said.
The president's whirlwind romance with Ms Bruni ahead of his visit to India sent officials looking into protocol manuals over how to treat his girlfriend in a country where relationships outside of marriage are still widely frowned upon.
Mr Sarkozy has been inseparable from her over the past few months and their romance has been grabbing headlines around the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and would have to stay in Paris.
I think the above sentence is flawed.
She told the newspapers that she had a new album to reord.
The above is fine.
She told the newspapers that she has a new album to reord. [This is incorrect.]
My question is on the words 'would have to stay in Paris'.
For me the words 'would have' implies a past event.
Look at the following example, please.
You went to a party yesterday and didn't ask me to follow.
If you asked I would have come with you. [This is a past event.]
She is going to work with a new album is a future event.
However, the following is fine.
She told the newspaper that she had a new album to record in February and wanted/had to stay in Paris.
I can't understand the reason for writing 'would have to stay in Paris'.
Top answer
I told you already to learn from editors, not criticize them. This is perfectly good reported speech. " Reported speech in the present time: She tells the newspaper that she has a new album to record in February and will have to stay in Paris.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0
I told you already to learn from editors, not criticize them.
This is perfectly good reported speech.
Direct speech:
She says "I have a new album to record in February and will have to stay in Paris."
Reported speech in the present time:
She tells the newspaper that she has a new album to record in
This is perfectly good reported speech.
Direct speech:
She says "I have a new album to record in February and will have to stay in Paris."
Reported speech in the present time:
She tells the newspaper that she has a new album to record in
00
Marius
I obey you.
The issue is that I am not clever as you all to judge sentences.
So I am posting here.
This is reported speech. However, this is a tall order for me; I can't convert the direct sentence to the indirect as you did. You are an ultra clever man in English grammar.
I have the Swan's book. Probably I bought it before you.
Marius, you wrote the following:
I obey you.
The issue is that I am not clever as you all to judge sentences.
So I am posting here.
This is reported speech. However, this is a tall order for me; I can't convert the direct sentence to the indirect as you did. You are an ultra clever man in English grammar.
I have the Swan's book. Probably I bought it before you.
Marius, you wrote the following:
00
RotterShe says "I have a new album to record in February and will have to stay in Paris."
Is it imperative to write 'will have to stay in Paris'?
Is the following fine?
She says "I have a new album to record in February and have to stay in Paris."
I have a new album to re
00
will->would
when switching from present to the past in reported speech
(see Swan)
when switching from present to the past in reported speech
(see Swan)
00
RotterThe issue is that I am not clever as you all to judge sentences.
Come'n, be fair! It has nothing to do with being clever but a matter of having lots of practice. If you want to get some courage, follow my posts.
00
0
