In another post I wrote: That's the best advice I've ever received on the subject matter. What should it be? 'That is' or 'That was'? One part of my brain is telling me: "You received the advice in the past, so it should be 'was'." The other voice argues, "You should use 'is' because that advice is still the best advice to you." And, if the correct usage is 'That was', do I need to change to 'I had ever received'? I don't(?) even know what my confusions are(?).
Both are correct in my opinion. It depends on the context. The second (was-had ever) implies it may no longer be the best advice, or that the advice is no longer relevant. Forget about 'advice' and substitute a different noun like 'gift'.
I think I kinda get what you meant by context? So if I'm to say that statement to someone in front of me right now and that advice is still the best right now, I should go with 'That's the best advice I've ever received on the subject matter.'?
Keep the "that's" contraction to cover em both and let the reader figure it out, if they're so inclined.
That's the best advice I've ever received. 's ==> is 've ==> have Your "have" is forcing an "is" in there because "have" is signalling present perfect. The apostrophe also forces an "is." Apostrophe-S is either "is" or "has," never "was." So you kind of have to read that as "is." If you wrote it out without contractions, you'd have: That is the best advice I have ever received. You could drop the "have" if you wanted to. That is/was the best advice I ever received. (or)That's the best advice I ever received. (the elision is really "is" because of the apostrophe) Here's where someone says that apostrophe-S can be "was." I would say that it's more likely to be a grammatically loose line and is still "is." It's probably even cheating into this weird tense called conversational historical present. That tense talks about the past in present tense. It shows up in dialog all the time, and if the MC is narrating in a strong voice, it can drop in narration too. In that case an apostrophe-S is still "is," but it's describing the past. Oh . . . the last question. You could use a "had" in there, but I wouldn't. It pushes the idea of receiving advice far back, but I don't think the line gains much from it. I mean, you could use it if you wanted to. It depends on the paragraph. Read very simply, I would say to not bother.
I don't think it's correct to say that "was" can never be used this way in a present perfect construction. "That was the best advice I've ever received" puts an emphasis on the past nature of the advice and possibly implies a decrease in relevance, whereas "That is the best advice I have ever received" does not. It sure looks to me like the two verb construction are independent of each other tense-wise, so I don't think they have to agree.
Thanks for all the responses, everyone! Firstly, Woah. I didn't know that. Did you mean 'That is the best advice I ever received.' and 'That is the best advice I have ever received.' convey the same meaning or they are at least interchangeable? Secondly, these two: a. That is the best advice I ever received. b. That was the best advice I ever received. What's the difference? What would be the determining factor between choosing which one to use? Is it the narrative tense of a given story or some other things? I mean, if I'm writing a story in the present tense, I should use a, if I'm writing the same story in the past tense, I should use b. Would that be correct? Or, are they interchangeable in a present-tense narrative? Sorry if this is all too confusing.
You need to provide more information. Is this story written in first person and is this sentence part of dialogue? If it's dialogue, I still say it depends. Consider: "Hey, is that an original Millennium Falcon?" "Yes, I got it for my fifth birthday. There was a shortage of Star Wars toys and I didn't think I'd get it. That was the best gift I ever received." Vs "Hey, what is that?" "That is (or That's) the best gift I ever received. It's an original edition Millennium Falcon." Both are correct to me. Here's another example: "Who's Kitch Flash?" A. "He's the best chef I ever employed." B. "He was the best chef I ever employed" C. "Losing him hurt. He was the best chef I had ever employed." To me, any of those could be correct. They say slightly different things, so it depends on what you or the character is trying to say. In my opinion, which one is correct or better depends on the focus of the conversation and the proximity of the subject in space and time as well. I know that sounds technical or maybe philosophical, but in dialogue I'd just think how you would say it yourself in the same situation.
When I read the examples you provided, I can more or less understand the subtle differences between the different versions. But if you ask me to explain it in my own words I would be at loss. I suppose I just haven't been able to grasp the vast dimensions of context and its role in relation to the English tense. It seems like I'm constantly doubting myself over the matter when I write, but not as much when I read. Maybe I'm just weird. Any suggestion for a good grammar book or other resources?
"That was the best advice I had ever received" is set in the past, It means the advice was the best you had ever received up to that point in time (the moment the advice was given). "That is the best advice I've ever received" is set in the present. It means that, even up until this very moment (the moment the statement is made) you still haven't received better advice. I keep running into pedantic statements like "You have to pick a tense and stick with it", but that isn't always true. Of course in dialogue and in inner thoughts we break that rule all the time. When people are talking and thinking, they do it in present tense, even if the story itself is in past tense. Nobody says "Let's went to the store." It's "let's go to the store." Even if the story is set in past tense. And in narration as well, certain things remain relevant even up to the current moment, and into the future. A few examples: 'He turned onto Finklebert-Schuster Avenue, that magnificent road that meanders all along the shoreline... ' Even though the events of the story are in the past, and his turning onto the road happened in the past, the road itself is still there and will be for the foreseeable future, and it still meanders along the coastline. Those facts are timeless and won't be changing anytime soon. 'He was an idiot, but time heals all wounds' This works partly because it's a saying. You wouldn't change the tense of a saying, but it's also a universal truth, so remains true at all times. The fact that time heals all wounds wasn't only true at that particular moment, but at all moments, in all places. Well, to the extent that it's actually true of course. Time doesn't necessarily heal all wounds, but it does heal many. So you have to determine which statements are attached specifically to that moment in the past that's being related, and which are timeless or universal truths that are still true and will remain true into the future. Those can and often should be rendered in present tense, unless it makes the line confusing.
This! I just wish one day I could figure this out by myself. I definitely want to be able to do this.
Yeah, I think you're right. So never mind that. My line was more about containing the idea in the past, and yours has it split between the immediate moment and the past, but yours is perfectly okay. I hadn't thought of that.
Grammatically, both are correct. Subjectively, my take is that if you have not since received better advice, then "That is" remains correct. However, if since then you have received better advice, then "That was" the best advice you had received up to that moment, but it "is" no longer the best advice you have received. Ergo ==> "That was."
