posted
I thought it would be about when you give someone the exact same thing as someone else at a birthday party.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Grammatically speaking, shouldn't that sentence be "Oh, that isn't really a question about grammar, linguistics, or anything else that is cool."
Posts: 1794 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, let's figure out the requirements for what makes something present, future or past tense. Is there a general rule we can deduce or is it just proper word choice?
There are languages that use markers rather than different verb tenses. Although it looks weird, maybe that's a more efficient way to structure a language.
I go to the house, tomorrow. I go to the house, today. I go to the house, now. I go to the house, yesterday.
quote:Okay, let's figure out the requirements for what makes something present, future or past tense. Is there a general rule we can deduce or is it just proper word choice?
I'm honestly a little confused. Is this question serious? The general rule is that tense depends on the form of the verb. There are a few exceptions, of course. The tense of verbs in subordinate clauses isn't always a strict indicator of time. And in English, we often use the present tense to indicate a future aspect, such as in "I'm going to take a test tomorrow." I believe this is the result of English not having a true future tense until the Middle English period.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT, it's imperative that you stop making these puns!
I'm sure that you thought about inviting me to make puns in this thread myself, but thought better of it, knowing that I'd decline.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you should all be in punner's prison and as everyone knows, there you don't get ANY conjugate visits.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm honestly a little confused. Is this question serious? The general rule is that tense depends on the form of the verb. There are a few exceptions, of course. The tense of verbs in subordinate clauses isn't always a strict indicator of time. And in English, we often use the present tense to indicate a future aspect, such as in "I'm going to take a test tomorrow." I believe this is the result of English not having a true future tense until the Middle English period.
Jon Boy, I'm actually wondering why we don't just leave the verb alone (one form for all tenses) and just use marker words. Wouldn't that be more efficient?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT, no problem. I'm just glad that my comment didn't offend you; I'd hate to have goaded you into taking a swipe at me with your clause.
Some languages do that Bob--Thai, for example. Because languages are organic, though, their rules aren't generally streamlined for efficiency.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Noemon, you're the definite article, that's for sure. In conjunction with that remark, I'd like to offer up a call for other interesting, Noemon-related complements.
posted
In English, the simple present tense can be used for future ("He arrives tomorrow"), for past ("In 44 B.C.E., Caesar is cruelly assassinated by his closest associates"), or for habitual/always true actions ("Dogs bark"; "On Fridays, Slash gets sloshed").
Seldom, however, is it used to show action in the present! For that we use the present progressive (or continuous).
"I am looking over Bob's shoulder right now" as opposed to "I look over Bob's shoulder right now."
Ain't English fun?
Posts: 1144 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Jon Boy, I'm actually wondering why we don't just leave the verb alone (one form for all tenses) and just use marker words. Wouldn't that be more efficient?
What's efficiency? Using fewer words, or using a simpler system of tenses? Either way, you've got a set of rules that you have to know and follow.
And anyway, from what I understand, verb tense is a more natural feature of language than separate tense markers. The reason separate markers arose is that tenses sometimes collapse together and the distinction is lost. In Proto-Germanic, all tenses collapsed together into past and present. In order to make other tenses, compounds had to be used. Our future is formed with will plus an infinitive, while many other tenses are formed with a form of be or have plus a participle. So English tenses are really a mix of verb tense and verb phrases.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
