Example A: John and another accused, Mike, had belonged to the Congress party at the time.

1) Is the above sentence correct?

2) If i use "were belonged to", does it change the meaning?

3) When should I use "had belonged to"; when should I use "were belonged to"?

Example B : "Meanwhile, no case about the accident has reported in any police station."

1) Is the above correct? As per my perception, it should be "has been reported" instead of only "has reported."

Please help me to understand.

1 Answer 1


Example A:

1) "...had belonged to" could be correct, but only if "the time" is a period prior to some other event in the past. For example:

  • When they were arrested, they had belonged to the Congress Party for three years. (The past perfect refers to something spoken of from a past perspective, which occurred farther in the past)

Otherwise, it's simple past:

  • When they were arrested, they belonged to the Congress Party.

2) You cannot use - "...were belonged to...".
The verb "belong" is intransitive, thus it cannot be made passive. But you could say "were members of...". which is the simple past, and equivalent to "belonged to... To put that into past perfect, "had belonged to" (as above) is equivalent to "had been members of". So...

  • When they were arrested, they were members of the Congress Party.


  • When they were arrested, they had been members of the Congress Party for three years.

3) see #2. Never use "were belonged to".

Example B: 1) You are correct, it should be "has been reported".

But if you mean nobody has reported the accident to the police, I would have said (AmE)

  • No report of the accident has been {filed/made} at any police station.

or, simply

  • The accident has not been reported to any police station.

It's not a "case" until after a report has been filed and the police begin to investigate.

You must log in to answer this question.

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