Grammar Problem

Seeing as you mention God, take an example from Genesis;

"God saw that the light was good"

Light was, is, and continues to be, good. However as the subject verb is past tense, then the object verb should be too. So (a) is the way to go.
I may be mistaken.

This sounds similar to reported speech.

“Doctors are generally hard-working people,” said Sebastian.

But:

Sebastian said that doctors were generally hard-working people.

I assume the reason that reported speech exists, and ‘are’ becomes ‘were’ in this example, is that what people have said in the past might no longer be true. Doctors might in fact no longer be hard working.

So:

“He found that God was righteous” because there is a possibility, no matter how slender, that God might no longer be righteous. In fact, He might now be as bent as a two-bob note.

Stick with “a”.

There are two ways of looking at tense in English found in textbooks these days.

The more traditional view is that there are six tenses in English (past simple, present simple, future simple, past perfect, present perfect, future perfect). There are also continuous and conditional forms, which I was told were tenses when I was at school, but I think it is not generally argued that these are tenses these days.

An alternative view is which is becoming more current is that English has only two tenses, known as past and non-past. All the rest are modal or periphrastic (ie constructed) forms. So in this view the forms "I have gone" and "I will go" are constructed, not "true tense", and should be seen as non-past, because the main verb (have, will) is non-past.

An argument that I have heard in favour of the two tense view is that this is "strict grammatical tense", and that there should be agreement throughout on tense. You can say "Now I have gone" and "Now I will go", but you can't say "Now I went" (unless you are using "now" other than in the sense of "at this moment".

If you take that view, then your (a) sentences are fine, because you have past forms in both parts of the sentence. In that view, your sentences (b) are not fine. But you can substitute other non-past forms into the main clause, such as "will know" and "have known", and find that they agree happily with the non-past form in the relative clause.

But actually I think we do hear sentences such as your (b) sentences. So perhaps I haven't quite understood this. I'm hoping Vinny is going to come and rescue me.

I'm hoping Vinny is going to come and rescue me.

Oops. I was glad to see that iviehoff had posted here so that I wouldn't have to address this. This always gives me pause in my own writing.

I would say that you can always use the past tense in the dependent clause, but you can use the present tense only if it expresses an enduring truth:

"The ancient Greeks knew that the world is round".
Or:
"But you knew that the Post Office is closed on Saturdays!"

The past tense is OK here as well:

"The ancient Greeks knew that the world was round".
Or:
"But you knew that the Post Office was closed on Saturdays!"

Thank you everyone, I also think that (a) is the way.

but as iviehoff had said
> But actually I think we do hear sentences such as your (b) sentences. So perhaps I haven't quite understood this.

and also in TonyK's example
> ""But you knew that the Post Office is closed on Saturdays!

I sometimes found myself speak such kind of grammar also something similar to this example:
b: He denied although he 'knew' my rate 'is' very cheap.

It seems strange to me to say
a: He denied although he 'knew' my rate 'was' very cheap.

So, does it have only one correct answer of (a) or rather depend on language style?

Edited by: ronnovsky

I was an editor for many years, but I don't remember the rules of grammar that I learned before I went to work. I edited partly according to what "sounded" right to me.

For the example you give at #6, ronnovsky, your own preference ("He knew my rate is very cheap") sounds all right to me, but my own choice would probably one of the following:

(1) He knew that my rate was reasonable; (2) He knew that I wouldn't be expensive; (3) He knew that I don't charge much.

One past, one conditional, one present. "He knew my rate was very cheap," which sounds strange to you, does not sound wrong to me. In fact, my own first example is only a slight rewording of that statement.

My recommendation to anyone whose native language is not English is to read as much and as widely as possible: newspapers, magazines, books, restaurant menus. As you see examples of the language in use, you may become comfortable using some of the phrases that sound unusual or even wrong to you now.

Your answer is very clear, thanks. I think I'll have to read more papers and magazines.

You're welcome! Good luck!