Until recently..

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

becky - 22 Jan 2004 20:12 GMT

I am wondering when to choose which in the following sentence and would like
to ask questions regarding it.

"Until recently there (was|has been|had been) only one drug for the disease."

First, are all the candidates possible? I have seen the present perfect tense
(that is, "has been") used, but am not sure if it is correct, because the
sentence strongly suggests that there are more than one drug
now.

Also could someone clarify when to use which? I'll take a stab at the first
and the last ones. Do the following use tenses correctly?

Until recently there had been only one drug for the disease, but *last month*
scientists at ABC university came up with a novel approach that would...

Until recently there was only one drug for the disease, but *now* pharmacies
across the nation carry many products that promise to cure it.

becky

Reply to this Message

Don Phillipson - 23 Jan 2004 00:35 GMT

> "Until recently there (was|has been|had been) only one drug for the disease."
> . . .
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Until recently there was only one drug for the disease, but *now* pharmacies
> across the nation carry many products that promise to cure it.

This is where precision helps enormously, e.g.
Until November 2002 only one drug was approved to
treat this disease, but in (date) scientists (or pharmacies)
discovered (or started selling) XYZ.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada)

Reply to this Message

becky - 23 Jan 2004 07:50 GMT

> > "Until recently there (was|has been|had been) only one drug for the
> disease."
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> treat this disease, but in (date) scientists (or pharmacies)
> discovered (or started selling) XYZ.

Is it okay to use "had been" in place of "was" above?

becky

Reply to this Message

Robert Bannister - 23 Jan 2004 01:10 GMT

> I am wondering when to choose which in the following sentence and would like
> to ask questions regarding it.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> Until recently there was only one drug for the disease, but *now* pharmacies
> across the nation carry many products that promise to cure it.

I think you've answered your own question. Certainly, your two examples
sound fine. "Had been" could only be used if the rest of the sentence
was in the past.

Signature

Rob Bannister

Reply to this Message

becky - 23 Jan 2004 07:43 GMT

> > I am wondering when to choose which in the following sentence and would like
> > to ask questions regarding it.
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> sound fine. "Had been" could only be used if the rest of the sentence
> was in the past.

Thanks! I needed confirmation like this. But I'm still not sure about
the present perfect tense. Is it correct? And if so, could someone give
me examples that illustrate the difference?

becky

Reply to this Message

Jody Bilyeu - 23 Jan 2004 21:01 GMT

> > > I am wondering when to choose which in the following sentence and would like
> > > to ask questions regarding it.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> the present perfect tense. Is it correct? And if so, could someone give
> me examples that illustrate the difference?

In either tense, because of the time marker, I'd probably flag the "was" for
tense sequence, if I caught it. "Until recently" is a rather mild time marker,
it seems.

In the present tense version, preserving consistency of tense with "has been,"
as you've astutely observed, creates a problem with the sense of the sentence.
Avoiding sense problems is one of the best reasons to switch tenses, so I'd go
with "had been" in that case, too.

Signature

Cheers,
Jody
jodybilyeu@smsu.edu

Reply to this Message

Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004

Until recently..