Past Perfect Tense
Hi there!!
I found this sentence and thought the tense is not correct.

"A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump."

I thought "were allowed" is not correct since the dumping was allowed before the agreement.
So I think "had been allowed" is better since past perfect tense in this sentence indicates that dumping was allowed before the agreement.
At least "are allowed" is supposed to be "were allowed" to indicate that dumping happened in the past.

Would you tell me which one seems more natural??
Is it okay to write "are allowed" in this sentence?? If so, please explain the reasons.

I appreciate any kinds of your helps. Thank you so much :)

Question

Past Perfect Tense
Hi there!!
I found this sentence and thought the tense is not correct.

"A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump."

I thought "were allowed" is not correct since the dumping was allowed before the agreement. 
So I think "had been allowed" is better since past perfect tense in this sentence indicates that dumping was allowed before the agreement.
At least "are allowed" is supposed to be "were allowed" to indicate that dumping happened in the past.

Would you tell me which one seems more natural??
Is it okay to write "are allowed" in this sentence?? If so, please explain the reasons.

I appreciate any kinds of your helps. Thank you so much :)

Answer

"A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump." This sounds fine to me.
 Look at this , ' reduced THE AMOUNT that ARE allowed to dump( in the future)

Answer

Interesting question. "had been allowed" is wrong because this period would refer to before the 1972 agreement.  The amount dumped before 1972 cannot be changed - the dumping happened and in 1972, it was too late to reduce it.

"were allowed" is OK.  It would describe the position in the past after 1972.  It wouldn't describe the current position.

"are allowed" is OK if the changed position after 1972 is also the current position.  This seems to be what the writer intends to express.

Answers · 4

Still haven’t found your answers?

Don’t miss out on the opportunity to learn a language from the comfort of your own home. Browse our selection of experienced language tutors and enroll in your first lesson now!