Scott,
 
If this sentence, "Politically Artois had only been [under] French control for less than a century and a half and that period had ended 330 years previously", scampered across your kitchen floor, you would hit it with a broom. It's too ugly to be alive.
 
(For once:) I agree with Herb that the sentence needs (in addition to a major overhaul) more context to make it possible to decide the appropriateness of the "had been".
 
The second 'had', however, is incorrect with or without more context. That period ended 330 years previously.
 
"There is nothing the word 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do for itself."  That's the rule.
 
.brad.21jan10.
 
~~~~~~
 
On Wed, 1/20/10, Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
Please don't shoot me for reentering such a touchy area but, I need comment on the following: "Politically Artois had only been French control for less than a century and a half and that period had ended 330 years previously."  [context is a discussion of a 1569 tax roll of Artois].

I read this sentence and wondered whether the first 'had been' should have been 'was.'

Scott Catledge



      

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/