Future in the past: was going to, would, was about to, and the grammar of plans that failed

English has a special corner of the grammar for plans that did not survive. I was going to call you. She knew it would rain. He was about to say something. Each of these stands at a point in the past and looks forward from it, and each one quietly warns the listener that what was coming did not arrive, or arrived differently, or was cut off before it could.

Grammar books call this the future in the past. Learners meet it late, which is odd, because it is the tense of excuses, regrets and interrupted moments, and everyday life is made almost entirely of those.

The idea: move the camera back

The ordinary future looks forward from now. The future in the past looks forward from a moment that is already over. Every future form you know simply shifts back one step:

That is the whole mechanism. The interesting part is not how the forms are built. It is what choosing them does to the meaning.

Was going to: the tense of derailed plans

Was going to reports a plan or intention that existed at a past moment:

• I was going to be a doctor.
• We were going to paint the kitchen this spring.
• She was going to tell him at dinner.

Here is the part that matters. If the plan had simply happened, you would use the past simple: I became a doctor. We painted the kitchen. She told him. The past simple reports facts. Was going to reports intentions, and the moment a speaker reaches for the intention instead of the fact, the listener understands why. Something got in the way.

• I was going to call you. (I did not.)
• We were going to sell the house. (We still have it.)
• He was going to say sorry. (He did not get the chance, or the character.)

Very often the sentence carries its own but: I was going to cook, but we went out. Even without the but, the flavour of failure hangs over the form. English speakers use this deliberately. I was going to do it is the politest available way of saying I did not do it, because it shows the intention was there even though the action was not.

One honest exception: when the outcome is interrupted or simply not stated, was going to can stay neutral. She was going to say something when the door opened tells you the moment was cut off, not that she failed. But the default reading, with no other information, is that the plan and the facts parted company.

Would: the future inside reported thought

When you report past speech or past thought, will becomes would:

• Direct: "It will rain." Reported: She said it would rain.
• Direct: "I will write." Reported: He promised he would write.
• Thought: She knew the shop would be closed.

This would points forward from the past moment of knowing, saying or promising. Whether the thing actually happened is a separate question, and that is exactly what makes the form useful for telling stories:

• She knew it would rain. (And it did. Or it did not. The sentence holds the future open.)
• He was sure the letter would come on Friday.
• Nobody thought the plan would work.

The last one shows the pattern at its best. Nobody thought the plan would work almost demands a second sentence, and both continuations are available: It did not or, better, It worked. Writers set up the future in the past precisely so that the facts can agree with it or betray it.

Full details of the tense shift live in reported speech. What matters here is the meaning: would after a past verb of speaking or thinking is not polite, not conditional, just future, seen from further back.

Not the same as the would of habit

English has another past would: the one that reports repeated past actions. Every summer we would swim in the river. That would means used to, and it has its own page: used to and would. The test is simple. Habit would describes something that happened many times. Future-in-the-past would sits after a verb like knew, said, thought or promised and describes something that had not happened yet.

• He would walk to work every day. (habit, it happened)
• He knew he would walk to work for the rest of his life. (future in the past)

Was about to: the interrupted moment

Was about to means the action was moments away:

• I was about to leave when the phone rang.
• She was about to knock when the door opened.
• He looked like a man who was about to say something stupid.

It takes the base verb, never -ing: was about to leave, not was about to leaving. And it practically demands an interruption. Something that was about to happen and then simply happened is not worth mentioning; the form exists for the moment when the phone rang, the door opened, the lights went out. When is its favourite word.

If was going to is the tense of derailed plans, was about to is the tense of near misses. The distance between them is time: you can be going to visit Paris for fifty years, but you can only be about to do something for a breath or two.

Why these forms taste of failure

Notice what all three have in common. Each one makes the listener stand at a past moment and look forward at something that, from where we are now, is already decided. The speaker knows how it ended. The form withholds it, or hints at it, and the hint is usually bad news.

The reason is competition. English already has a perfectly good way to report a past action that happened: the past simple. Every time a speaker chooses was going to or was about to instead, the listener silently asks why the plain past was not available, and the answer is nearly always that the action never made it that far. The grammar does not say the plan failed. It just declines to say the plan succeeded, in a language where saying so would have been easy. Listeners do the rest.

That is why I was going to pay you back has never once, in the history of English, been followed by the money.

Common mistakes

Ranked by how often learners actually make them.

1. Using will after a past reporting verb. She said it will rain mixes two viewpoints. After said, knew, thought, promised, the future is would: She said it would rain.
2. Using was going to for things that happened. I was going to visit my aunt yesterday means you did not. If the visit happened, say I visited my aunt yesterday.
3. An -ing verb after about to. I was about to leaving is wrong. About to takes the base verb: I was about to leave.
4. Double marking the past. I was going to went is wrong. Only the first verb carries the past: I was going to go.
5. Confusing the two woulds. When I was young I would be a doctor reads as a habit and makes no sense. A derailed ambition needs was going to: I was going to be a doctor.

Practice

Decide what really happened. Answers are below.

1. We were going to move to the coast. Did they move?
2. She was about to sign the contract. What do you expect the next word to be?
3. He knew the answer would be no. Is this about the past or the future?
4. I painted the bedroom. Why not I was going to paint the bedroom?
5. They would eat at the same table every night. Plan or habit?

Answers: 1. Almost certainly not; that is the form's whole job. 2. When, followed by an interruption. 3. Both: a past belief about what was then the future. 4. Because it happened; the past simple reports facts. 5. Habit; this is the would of used to and would.

The machinery for shifting whole sentences into the past viewpoint is on the reported speech page, and the verbs that do the reporting, each with its own grammar, are on reporting verbs. For plans in the other direction, seen from now, start at future tense.