Tom is supposed to be here half an hour ago

Tom is supposed to be here half an hour ago.
The above sentence is grammatically wrong, isn’t it?

4 Likes

Tom is supposed to have been here half an hour ago. (rewritten by me)
Is the above sentence correct?

4 Likes

How about ‘Tom was supposed to be here half an hour ago’? Or ‘Tom should have been here half an hour ago’.

6 Likes

Yes, it is correct. The verbal part ‘to have been’ indicates PAST.
(I also concur with Torsten for his alternatives.)

3 Likes

Shall we say, ‘Tom should have been here half an hour before".

1 Like

Yes, you can, as suggested by Torsten!

2 Likes
  1. Tom should have been here half an hour before.
  2. Tom should have been here half an hour ago.
    What’s the difference in meaning between the above two sentences?
2 Likes

The difference.

  1. Tom should have been here half an hour before. (Before something else occurred)
  2. Tom should have been here half an hour ago. (Half an hour ago from now)

Let me recast the two sentences slightly modified.

  1. Tom should have been here half an hour before the arrival of the chief guest.
  2. Tom should have been here half an hour ago so that I could have introduced him to my friends.

I hope Teo gets the point!

4 Likes