had been

[marie]

If I use one tense (had been) in English, does it mean, I must continue to use that tense throughout? It seems like a silly question, but it just seems a bit heavy to me. This had been, and that had been.

I wrote this sentence:

>Once the training phase had been completed, and a forecast modelled, sample data was then required in order to predict the actual results for the following day.

And it seems a bit heavy... had been... then had been.

So I considered changing one of the tenses to this:

>Once the training phase had been completed and a forecast had been modelled, sample data was then required in order to predict the actual results for the following day.

Not sure. Need the advise of a native speaker.

Marie.

[hubertus]

Marie, Re: Once the training phase had been completed, and a forecast modelled ...
reads fine and is grammatically complete in itself. You could repeat the pluperfect had been if you wanted to emphasise it for some stylistic reason. The danger of doing this is that the result would sound rather wordy and repetetive.

[Dave]

Once the training phase had been completed, and a forecast modelled, sample data was then required in order to predict the actual results for the following day.

What hubertus is indicating is that your first (only) had been in this version "carries through" or is understood to be there as well for the second verb modelled. I wouldn't use the first comma--it makes the second verbal seem parenthetical. If you're concerned about wordiness, you could remove in order and actual:

Once the training phase had been completed and a forecast modelled, sample data was then required to predict the results for the following day.

[marie]

Thank you so much. I didn't know it "carried through". I thought you had to repeat the past perfect.

Thanks.

[hubertus]

Sept 7, 2012 6:54:34 GMT marie said:

Thank you so much. I didn't know it "carried through". I thought you had to repeat the past perfect.

Thanks.

I reckon it was the pluperfect: j'avais été etc.