0

Here's a context. A person has changed his main Facebook email address to [email protected]. His previous email address is/was [email protected]. Assuming that the person will never change his Facebook email address anymore, I have this sentence:

The email address that was associated with his Facebook account is [email protected].

I was thinking that is [email protected] can be correct since the previous email address will never change (i.e., in the future, the previous email address would still be [email protected]). On the other hand, using was [email protected] sounds natural but I don't understand why it would be correct because I thought that was is used to refer to a past event and [email protected] is not an event.

I appreciate if someone could help me with my confusion. Thanks.

1 Answer 1

0

It might be best to use was since it is in the past.

The email address that was associated with his Facebook account was [email protected].

Your confusion might be from

The email address is [email protected], that was associated with his Facebook account is [email protected].

Q: What was associated with his Facebook account?
A: That email address is [email protected].

But using "was", eventhough repetitive, would be best.

The email address was [email protected], that was associated with his Facebook account is [email protected].

Q: What was associated with his Facebook account?
A: That email address was [email protected].

2
  • Peter, do you mean that using is is wrong? Aug 4, 2017 at 12:46
  • Not at all, but there may be an ambiguity using "is". In my second example (which is the same as your example), what is being talked about is the email address at that time, this is established with additional context. You would be able to use "was" without all the additional context but most people would still understand what you are saying if you use "is".
    – Peter
    Aug 6, 2017 at 12:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .