Any problems with this?

[palinkasocsi]

Dear Friends,

Does anybody find any mistake in the following:

Consider the following situation, in which railway workers are planning to strike for rise in salary and they have promised to inform people in advance before they would begin their protest. One dawn, however, railwaymen go on strike without having warned the public about their intent. As a result, commuter students are unable to get to school the next day and two of the teachers enter into the following exchange:

(24) A: A lot of students are absent from my class today.
B: Yeah, the railway company announced the beginning of the strike, as promised.



My points of concern are the following:

1. without having warned/without warning
2. the next day/tomorrow
3. announced/has announced
4. as promised/as had been promised

Thank you very much for any help.

Palinkasocsi

[rogual]

Nope, nothing wrong with it. (Except it should be "a rise in salary", and "before they begin".)

1. Without having warned is correct, because the warning (or lack thereof) takes place before the strike. Without warning wouldn't be as correct.

2. The next day is correct. Tomorrow always refers to the day after the day when the speaker is speaking.

3. Announced is fine, because it's a single event in the past. Has announced is good too.

4. As promised is idiomatic. As had been promised sounds a little clunky.

HTH

[Marius Hancu]

I concur with the above, but:

3. I'd use has announced, still related to the present and recent.

Also, one morning. One dawn is kind of both rare and strange (as though they're looking for the sun to come up!)

Anyway, something isn't logic about the next day. Strikes are announced many times at midnight, and the students are inconvenienced next morning, or better in the morning. It's up to you to decide on the exact chronology.

[palinkasocsi]

Thanks Rogual and Marius!

Palinkasocsi