Reporting verbs

[manhhiep2509]

Hello

I see that if I want to report someone's statement, I must change the verb tense in the person's statement. For example:
John said, "I will go to the party"
"he said that he would go to the party"

My problem is that I am not sure what the criterion is to realize those "reporting verbs". I only know about two or three reporting verbs such as to say, tell, and ask.
Do we recognize those reporting verbs by their meanings?

Or is there a limited list of reporting verbs?

When I use these reporting verbs, do I have to change the verb as the above example does?

I have to ask the question because it could help me decide whether verb tense in the sentence having reporting verb is correct.

Please clarify the confusion.
Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

In English, there's no sense at all in distinguishing "reported speech" from other things, because the use of tenses is identical in every respect.

E.g.,

* Would is used for things that were "future" during the timeframe of the sentence, but aren't anymore (or are no longer valid).
Jeremy told me that he and Alycia would probably get married, but they broke up last week.
I thought that Jeremy and Alycia would probably get married, but they broke up last week.

* If something is still in the future, then will should be used, even if the main timeframe is in the past.
Jeremy told me that he and Alycia will probably get married next year. (If they've broken up since then, you'd use "would".)
Last week, I found out that I will only live to be 48 years old.

--

There are other languages, e.g., Russian, in which "reported speech" must be studied separately, because, in such languages, the function of verb tenses actually changes in "reported" situations.
In English there are no such changes, so there's no reason to make the distinction.

[manhhiep2509]

In English, there's no sense at all in distinguishing "reported speech" from other things, because the use of tenses is identical in every respect.

E.g.,

* Would is used for things that were "future" during the timeframe of the sentence, but aren't anymore (or are no longer valid).
Jeremy told me that he and Alycia would probably get married, but they broke up last week.
I thought that Jeremy and Alycia would probably get married, but they broke up last week.

* If something is still in the future, then will should be used, even if the main timeframe is in the past.
Jeremy told me that he and Alycia will probably get married next year. (If they've broken up since then, you'd use "would".)
Last week, I found out that I will only live to be 48 years old.

--

There are other languages, e.g., Russian, in which "reported speech" must be studied separately, because, in such languages, the function of verb tenses actually changes in "reported" situations.
In English there are no such changes, so there's no reason to make the distinction.

Grammar books that I read often only say that "typically we move the tenses -- the tenses in reported statement -- back in time one step" without mentioning other exceptions.
That is why I have this trouble.

Your explanation really give me insight into the use of verb tenses.

Thank you Ron.

[tim]

Be careful reading grammar books that are not specifically designed for use with the GMAT. Ron's explanations are better than any grammar book you can find; glad they helped. :)

[joeqanderson90]

That's true, you need to make sure that the grammar books you are using are suitable. I always find that if a person explains something to me, I understand it a lot more than if I read it in a book.

[RonPurewal]

That's true, you need to make sure that the grammar books you are using are suitable. I always find that if a person explains something to me, I understand it a lot more than if I read it in a book.

We've evolved to socialize with other humans, not with books, so this is hardly surprising.

The cue you should take here is this: When you read something in a book, imagine how you'd explain it to someone who doesn't already understand it. Ideally, imagine having to explain it to someone who is, say, 11 or 12 years old.
If you do this, you should, almost without trying, be able to...
... simplify the idea (most people are weirdly good at this when an actual 11-year-old is standing in front of them, even if they are bad at it otherwise);
... give EXAMPLES of the idea.

Examples are hugely important, because our brains are literally wired to understand by analogy to examples, and NOT to understand by using explicit rules. If you don't see this right away, think about how you learned your first language, or about how you learned what is "polite" and "rude".
Now, think about whether you'd be able to make rules for these ideas. Probably not.