Tense Shifts in Reported Speech

When you report what someone said and your reporting verb is in the past (disse, perguntou, contou, explicou, afirmou, respondeu), the reported verb almost always backshifts — it moves to a tense that locates the action one step further into the past. This is the most mechanical and most important shift in reported speech, and the one English speakers get wrong most often, because English backshift is looser and more optional.

This page gives you the complete table of shifts, shows each transformation worked out with examples, and — crucially — tells you when the shift does not apply, because that is just as important. The overview page has the bigger picture. This page is the mechanics.

The master table

Here is the complete set of shifts when the reporting verb is in the past (disse, perguntou, contou, explicou, etc.):

The table looks long, but notice the pattern: already-past tenses don't shift again (imperfect stays imperfect, pluperfect stays pluperfect, imperfect subjunctive stays imperfect subjunctive). There's no tense "further back" than the pluperfect, so the backshift stops there. The same is true for the conditional — it's already a tense that expresses hypothetical or future-in-the-past meaning, so it has nowhere to go.

Shift by shift, with examples

Present → Imperfect

The present indicative of the original becomes the imperfect indicative in the reported clause. This is the workhorse shift: the vast majority of everyday reported speech involves present → imperfect.

The imperfect is the right choice here because it expresses a state or habitual action viewed from a past perspective — exactly what you want when reporting someone's past description of a present-tense habit.

Even for present-tense constructions with há (indicating duration up to the moment of speaking), the shift to imperfect is standard. The imperfect + há combination is natural Portuguese.

The progressive estar a + infinitive becomes estava a + infinitive. The whole construction pivots to the imperfect by shifting the auxiliary.

Preterite → Pluperfect

The simple past (preterite) becomes the pluperfect (tinha + past participle). This encodes "past of a past": an action that was already complete when the reported moment happened.

English does the same shift (missed → had missed), though English speakers often get lazy and skip it. In Portuguese, skipping it produces a temporal mismatch:

The pluperfect here is essential. Without it, you imply you missed the train, not the person being reported on.

Present perfect compound (tenho feito) → Pluperfect

Portuguese's present perfect compound (tenho feito, tenho estado, etc.) expresses ongoing or repeated action up to the present. When reported in past frame, it collapses into the pluperfect, because the whole time-stretch is now seen from outside:

The loss of "ongoing into the present" meaning is inherent to backshift — from a past vantage point, nothing is ongoing into our present; it was ongoing into his present, which is now past.

Imperfect → Imperfect (no change)

The imperfect is already a past tense with the right temporal profile, so reporting doesn't shift it:

Pluperfect → Pluperfect (no change)

The pluperfect already locates the action two steps back; there is nowhere further to shift:

Simple future → Conditional

The simple future farei, comerei, irei becomes the conditional faria, comeria, iria. The conditional, at root, is "the future as seen from the past" — and that is exactly what a reported future needs to express.

Future with ir → Imperfect of ir + infinitive

In speech, Portuguese heavily prefers the ir + infinitive periphrastic future to the simple future. When reported, the auxiliary vou/vais/vai shifts to the imperfect ia/ias/ia:

This shift is so natural you probably won't think about it — ia fazer slides into place automatically.

Future perfect → Conditional perfect

The future perfect (terei acabado, terei ido) becomes the conditional perfect (teria acabado, teria ido):

Conditional → Conditional (no change)

Notice the second clause: não posso (present) shifts to não podia (imperfect), following the present → imperfect rule.

Present subjunctive → Imperfect subjunctive

When the subordinate clause of the original was in the present subjunctive (triggered by expressions of wish, doubt, emotion, or certain conjunctions), it shifts to the imperfect subjunctive in reported past speech:

This shift is mandatory whenever the reporting verb is in the past and the original was in the present subjunctive. Leaving the subjunctive in the present creates an ungrammatical temporal mismatch.

Future subjunctive → Imperfect subjunctive

The future subjunctive appears in Portuguese in quando, se, assim que, and similar future-oriented clauses: "quando chegar", "se tiver tempo", "assim que souber". In reported speech with a past reporting verb, it becomes the imperfect subjunctive:

This is one of the shifts that Spanish speakers find initially counter-intuitive, because Spanish has largely lost the future subjunctive. Portuguese preserves it in direct speech, and the reported version lands in the imperfect subjunctive — symmetric with how the simple future lands in the conditional.

Imperfect subjunctive, pluperfect subjunctive → no change

These already express distance from the reporting moment. They don't shift further:

When the shift does NOT apply

The backshift rules above assume a past reporting verb. But reported speech with a present or future reporting verb doesn't trigger the shift. This is the most important exception, and the one that trips up learners who've mechanically memorized "always backshift when reporting".

Present reporting verb → no shift

If you say diz, afirma, explica, pergunta, the reported clause stays in whatever tense the original used:

The logic: if the reporting is happening now, the reported proposition's time-frame is still anchored to now, not to a past moment.

Future reporting verb → no shift

When the reported content is still true (and you want to signal it)

Even with a past reporting verb, you can choose to skip the backshift if you want to emphasize that what was said is still true from the reporting moment's perspective. This is a register and semantic choice, not a mistake:

The unshifted version feels a touch more emphatic about the ongoing truth; the shifted version is more purely narrative. Both are grammatical. This is not a case where "one is right and one is wrong"; it's a real expressive choice.

With the preterite of dizer que + eternal truths

In journalism and narration, Portuguese sometimes keeps the present for timeless or still-current propositions even under a past reporting verb. Shifts are variable; writers treat this as a stylistic decision.

A worked example: a full paragraph, direct to indirect

Direct: "Ontem o João disse-me: «Estou farto do meu emprego. Vou pedir demissão na segunda-feira. Já falei com a minha esposa e ela concorda. Se conseguir um emprego melhor, mudamo-nos para o Porto.»"

Indirect: "Ontem o João disse-me que estava farto do emprego dele. Ia pedir demissão na segunda-feira. Já tinha falado com a esposa e ela concordava. Se conseguisse um emprego melhor, mudavam-se para o Porto."

Let's trace each shift:

1. Estou (present) → estava (imperfect). Standard present → imperfect.
2. Do meu emprego (possessive) → do emprego dele. Possessive adjusted to third-person reporter's perspective.
3. Vou pedir (ir + infinitive) → ia pedir (imperfect of ir + infinitive).
4. Já falei (preterite) → já tinha falado (pluperfect). Past → further past.
5. Concorda (present) → concordava (imperfect).
6. Se conseguir (future subjunctive) → se conseguisse (imperfect subjunctive).
7. Mudamo-nos (present indicative, conditional main clause) → mudavam-se (imperfect — Portuguese prefers the imperfect to the conditional in informal contrary-to-fact conditionals).

That's seven coordinated shifts in a short paragraph. Each one is mechanical once you know the rule, but the coordination is the skill.

A quick reference: when in doubt

1. Is the reporting verb past? If no, no shift.
2. What tense is the original? Find it in the master table.
3. Apply the shift. Don't forget that subjunctive clauses shift too.
4. Check the whole paragraph for coordination. Every verb in the reported content should be consistent with the new frame.
5. Adjust pronouns and deictics (this is handled on the overview page).

Common Mistakes

The shift to imperfect is the default. The unshifted present is only correct if you mean to signal continuing present relevance ("and it's still true that he has one"), and even then, most native speakers use the imperfect.

The preterite needs to backshift to the pluperfect when reported. Foi describes an event in the reporter's time-frame; tinha ido describes an event already complete before the reporting moment.

Farei is first-person simple future, inappropriate after a third-person past reporting verb. The conditional faria is the future-in-the-past and the correct shift.

Present subjunctive → imperfect subjunctive in reported past. Also note ligue → ligaria (future subjunctive → imperfect subjunctive in the first, but future indicative becomes conditional in the main clause).

The Portuguese present perfect compound collapses into the pluperfect when reported in the past. The unshifted version is only acceptable if the illness is explicitly still ongoing at the reporting moment.

Key Takeaways

1. Reporting verb past → backshift. This is the rule you apply 95% of the time.
2. Reporting verb present or future → no shift. The reported content keeps its original tense.
3. Imperfect, pluperfect, conditional, and imperfect subjunctive don't backshift further. They're already "past enough".
4. Subjunctive clauses shift too: present subjunctive → imperfect subjunctive; future subjunctive → imperfect subjunctive.
5. Coordination matters: every verb in a reported paragraph must be consistent with the new temporal frame.
6. Eternal truths may optionally skip the shift as a stylistic choice. Both versions are grammatical.