Look at these examples to see how we can tell someone what another person said.
direct speech: 'I love the Toy Story films,' she said.
indirect speech: She said she loved the Toy Story films.
direct speech: 'I worked as a waiter before becoming a chef,' he said.
indirect speech: He said he'd worked as a waiter before becoming a chef.
direct speech: 'I'll phone you tomorrow,' he said.
indirect speech: He said he'd phone me the next day.
Try this exercise to test your grammar.
- Grammar test 1
Read the explanation to learn more.
Grammar explanation
Reported speech is when we tell someone what another person said. To do this, we can use direct speech or indirect speech.
direct speech: 'I work in a bank,' said Daniel.
indirect speech: Daniel said that he worked in a bank.
In indirect speech, we often use a tense which is 'further back' in the past (e.g. worked) than the tense originally used (e.g. work). This is called 'backshift'. We also may need to change other words that were used, for example pronouns.
Present simple, present continuous and present perfect
When we backshift, present simple changes to past simple, present continuous changes to past continuous and present perfect changes to past perfect.
'I travel a lot in my job.''The baby's sleeping!'
- Jamila said that she travelled a lot in her job.
'I've hurt my leg.'
- He told me the baby was sleeping.
- She said she'd hurt her leg.
Past simple and past continuous
When we backshift, past simple usually changes to past perfect simple, and past continuous usually changes to past perfect continuous.
'We lived in China for five years.''It was raining all day.'
- She told me they'd lived in China for five years.
- He told me it had been raining all day.
Past perfect
The past perfect doesn't change.
'I'd tried everything without success, but this new medicine is great.'
- He said he'd tried everything without success, but the new medicine was great.
No backshift
If what the speaker has said is still true or relevant, it's not always necessary to change the tense. This might happen when the speaker has used a present tense.
'I go to the gym next to your house.''I'm working in Italy for the next six months.'
- Jenny told me that she goes to the gym next to my house. I'm thinking about going with her.
'I've broken my arm!'
- He told me he's working in Italy for the next six months. Maybe I should visit him!
- She said she's broken her arm, so she won't be at work this week.
Pronouns, demonstratives and adverbs of time and place
Pronouns also usually change in indirect speech.
'I enjoy working in my garden,' said Bob.'We played tennis for our school,' said Alina.
- Bob said that he enjoyed working in his garden.
- Alina told me they'd played tennis for their school.
However, if you are the person or one of the people who spoke, then the pronouns don't change.
'I'm working on my thesis,' I said.'We want our jobs back!' we said.
- I told her that I was working on my thesis.
- We said that we wanted our jobs back.
We also change demonstratives and adverbs of time and place if they are no longer accurate.
'This is my house.''We like it here.'
- He said this was his house. [You are currently in front of the house.]
- He said that was his house. [You are not currently in front of the house.]
'I'm planning to do it today.'
- She told me they like it here. [You are currently in the place they like.]
- She told me they like it there. [You are not in the place they like.]
- She told me she's planning to do it today. [It is currently still the same day.]
- She told me she was planning to do it that day. [It is not the same day any more.]
In the same way, these changes to those, now changes to then, yesterday changes to the day before, tomorrow changes to the next/following day and ago changes to before.
Do this exercise to test your grammar again.
- Grammar test 1
1. Direct: " Columbus discovered America in 1492"
Indirect: Joe said Columbus discovered America in 1492
2. Direct: "Nick left this morning"
Indirect: She told me Nick had left that morning
Direct speech is past simple, but case 1 used in past simple, case 2 used in past perfect. Is there any difference between case 1 and case 2? Help me.
Hello Sandy Nguyen,
We use perfect forms when there is a connection of some kind between an earlier action and a past, present or future situation. For example, look at these two sentences:
The first sentence tells us about the sequence of events: first the bus leaves and after that Paul arrives. There's no reason to think the events are connected or influence on another. However, the second sentence is different. Here, we understand that there is some connection between the events – probably that Paul wanted to catch the bus and did not.
Now, if you think about your examples you can see that there is no connection between Joe's speech (Joe said...) and the discovery of the Americas by Columbus. However, there may well be a connection between Nick leaving and the situation of the second example. Perhaps the speaker (the person 'she' is talking to) wanted to speak to Nick, for example.
The choice of past perfect or past simple is not a black and white question. It's very much dependent on how the speaker sees the actions/states and what the context is. I hope the explanation has helped to clarify it for you.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank you so much!
Hi team, thanks a lot for your detail explanation about report statements. I have a question:
Question 1
*Direct: "I was waiting for the bus when he arrived."
*Indirect (1): She told me that she was waiting for the bus when he arrived.
*Indirect (2): She told me that she had been waiting for the bus when he had arrived.
*Indirect (3): She told me that she had been waiting for the bus when he arrived.
*Question 2:
*Direct: "He could read when he was three."
*Indirect (1): She said that he could read when he was three.
*Indirect (2): She said that he could read when he had been three.
Which indirect sentence is correct?
Hope you reply soon.
Thanks a lot.
Hello cute,
For question 1, both 1 and 3 are correct -- which is better depends on the situation. Most books would probably say 3 is the correct one.
For question 2, 1 is correct.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Sir,
what is the indirect speech of this sentence?
He said, “let it rain ever so hard, I shall go”.
Hello abhay,
I'm not completely sure I fully understand what 'he' intends by saying this, but you could say something like 'He said he would go however hard it rained'. A structure like this one requires a little creativity!
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
She promised me that she(will-would) help me in the training tomorrow.
hello. I have a doubt, please could you help me?
If in the direct speech I use the time adverb " The next Friday" , is it right to replace it with the form " The Friday after"? In my opinion it is wrong, but I have read many explanation about the replacement of next and now I'm a little bit confused. Thanks
ex. "I'm going to stay out later next Friday"
She said she was going to stay out later the Friday after.
Hello Barbarap70,
Yes, that's correct. It is context-dependent in the sense that we don't know when 'next Friday' is when we are reporting the speech as we may be reporting it a few moment after it was said or a few days or even longer. However, in general we change 'next week' (etc) to 'the week after' or 'the following week' when reporting speech.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi, can you help me with this. Why don't we backshift the 2nd clause? I thought the 2nd clause must be "when she had retired".
'She had worked for that school for 40 years when she retired.' → He told me that she had for that school for 40 years when she retired.
Thank you.
Hello jaydeptrai,
Both forms are possible here but I think the past simple is better because it makes clear that the 40 years preceded the retirement. If you use 'she had retired' then the sequence is not clear and it could mean that she first retired (from a different job) and then began working for the school, which she did for 40 years. The past simple removes this potential ambiguity.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
hi
could you please help me with this question
she said "I had to come back fast because it was very crowded"
she said that she had to come back fast because it was very crowded is this right or she said that she had had to come back fast because it was very crowded is right?
and explanation, please!
Hello eloee100,
Normally we apply the 'backshift' to the reported action, so the past simple 'had to' is normally backshifted to the past perfect 'had had to' (that is, your second sentence).
In informal speaking, though, sometimes people don't backshift a verb if it won't cause any confusion.
If you're writing for an English exam or English teacher, I'd recommend you use the backshifted form. It's probably also better to use it in your informal speaking, too.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello GiulianaAndy,
Used in reported speech, 'that' is a conjunction rather than a preposition. In this use (reported speech) it does not change the maning and can be omitted.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Help me please change this sentence into reported speech.
Roy's mother said: "I am glad my son is a musician."
Which is right "Roy's mother said she was glad her son was a musician"or "Roy's mother said she is glad her son is a musician" ?
Hello K.kh,
Both forms are possible. If you keep the verb in the present tense ('...is a musician') then you are making it clear that the son is still a musician now.
If you move the verb back into the past tense ('...was a musician') then we do not know if the son is still a musician; we know only that he was a musician when his mother spoke.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello sisi,
This is explained in the last part of the grammar explanation:
This is because the direct speech sentence was spoken a week ago. If the reported speech sentence said 'ago', it would refer to a time after the time the direct speech was said.
For example, if today is 21 February, the direct speech sentence was said on 14 February. If the reported speech sentence said 'ago', it would refer to 18 February instead of 11 February.
Does that make sense?
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi BobMux,
I'd probably say this:
The reporting verb wonder shows John's imagining well here. The past simple verb (was) is backshifted to the past perfect (had been).
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Stellaaa,
That's almost correct. You should say 'mention it to him':
Obviously, we can't see the context in which you are using this, but I think this is what you intend.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Tim,
This refers to both simple and continuous forms. If the original sentence (direct speech) contains a past perfect form, simple or continuous, it does not change when reported.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Sebastian,
When direct speech is reported we can shift the verb form back in time to show that we are talking about the time of speaking, or we can leave the verb form as it is if the information is still true at the time of reporting. Thus we often have a choice.
The first reported speech sentence tells us that at the time when she spoke to us, the teacher was intelligent. It does not tell us anything about the present. The teacher may have changed in some way, or may have died.
The second version tells us that the teacher was intelligent at the time she spoke to us, and is still intelligent today.
As intelligence is a characteristic which is considered inherent and unchanging for the most part, unless the teacher has died there is no reason not to use the second version, and it would clarify any ambiguities regarding whether or not the teacher is still with us. However, grammatically speaking, both versions are correct.
Imperatives are usually reported using tell with an infinitive. As the second clause is not an imperative a second reporting structure is required or a linker of some kind:
It seems highly unlikely that the speaker is reporting this during the race (though not impossible, of course), so versions 1 and 2 would be more likely. However, if the race were still ongoing (imagine two teammates talking during the race) then versions 3 and 4 would be possible.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Peter,
I'm in confusion regarding how the imperative sentence "Don't stop, we can win the race" has been reported. If these words are uttered by any third person speaker, shouldn't we then change the pronoun 'we' to 'they'? Like for instance-- He told us not to stop as they could win the race. But if it is said by first person figure, then the one mentioned in the above reply is correct. The reported version of the speech should be then--I told not to stop as we could win the race. If I haven't been able to get the context considering which you changed the speech, please do let clarify.
With regards
Sandeep Mandal
Hello smandal973,
It really depends on the details of the context. We could have a situation in which there are many people involved, such as in a team sport. Then it would be possible to have someone who is part of the team but who was not the speaker.
Team member 1: "Don't stop, we can win the race."
Team member 2: "What did he say?"
Team member 3: "He told us..."
I was actually thinking about a team coach giving instructions to a team, but you could imagine all sorts of contexts which would give rise to different pronoun choices.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Via,
Well spotted, and it is correct! Actually, there are two past events. The second event is the act of speaking (Alina told me). The past perfect event (they'd played tennis) happened earlier than that act of speaking.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi NataliaVarela,
You are correct that we often have a choice when reporting what people said. Both of these are possible:
The first, as you say, tells us that the person reporting the statement believes that it is still true today; the second does not give any indication of this.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello nicolettalee,
B is the best answer here, particularly if you're taking an English test or writing this in a text. In reported speech, 'would' describes past beliefs about the future.
In informal speaking, though, people sometimes use forms like A. That's fine for informal speaking, but strictly speaking, 'would' is the correct form here.
By the way, we have another explanation of reported speech in our English grammar reference that you might also find useful.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kim Hui-jeong,
Yes! I think both options make sense in both sentences. Actually, I slightly prefer the past simple versions that you suggest. As the other sentences make the timeframe of actions clear, it's common in everyday language use to simplify the tenses we use.
Thank you for your interesting questions! We do our best to respond to questions as soon as we can, but we are just a small team.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kim Hui-jeong,
OK, great! I'm glad you've found the answer.
Just to let you know, I've deleted the link as we don't allow linking to external websites here (House rules).
Best wishes to you,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kim Hui-jeong,
He would say that he met or has met Mike. The first option (met) would be more common in American English, and the second (has met) would be more common in British English.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello OwO,
Yes, that's right. Well done!
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team