Site Feedback

Resolved questions
Simple past & past perfect

Let's assume someone was found dead in the bathroom, and some
detectives were making a conclusion from the murder scene:

1.They believed the killer was a hired assassin.
2.They believed the killer had been a hired assassin.

What's the difference? Do they convey different meanings?

Thank you.

For learning: English
Base language: English
Category: Language

Share:

0 comments

    Please enter between 2 and 2000 characters.

     

    Answers

    Sort by:
    Best Answer - Chosen by the Asker
    saying the killer had been a hired assassin makes it seem like he was only a hired assassin for that one kill and never again was an assassin. It is hard to explain but just sounds slightly strange to me. Slightly different meanings. I'm not sure I can really explain it any better. Sorry.

    Both of these convey the same meaning. There really is no difference at all. I would like to expand further, but they both mean the same thing.

    They believed that the killer was a hired assassin.

    Much better still:
    They believed the killer to be a hired assassin.

    The other one with "had been" is totally wrong. You only have to convert the scene in the present tense and none of it makes sense.
    (I believe the killer has been an assassin....WRONG)

    Submit your answer


    Please enter between 2 and 2000 characters.

    If you copy this answer from another italki answer page, please state the URL of where you got your answer from.