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.
Search from various English teachers...
Answers · 8
1
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.
0
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)
0
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.
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!
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!
Start Learning Today
