Shun, if we `went' somewhere `yesterday'
then we cannot be talking about a present
action: These words locate in past time.

`We are on our way to a picnic' is a present
action. `We are going to a picnic tomorrow'
is a present action (i.e.: spoken now)
that anticipates a future one.

I seriously doubt that tense and its aspects
can yield definition. Some general, orienting remarks
(for the purpose of teaching recognition of formations)
is the closest we can get to it.

Sophie

----- Original Message -----
From: shun Tang <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: How to define a 'present action'?


> Dear Sophie,
>
> Thank you for you answer. You have described very well what it HAS.
> Can you now describe what it IS?
>
> For example, IS "Yesterday we went to picnic together" a present action?
Why
> not?
> How do you see a present action? I hope you can give an example, so we may
> learn about it.
>
> Shun
> englishtense.com
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sophie Johnson" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: How to define a 'present action'?
>
>
> > Shun, does `a present action' not have
> > several aspects? E.g.: I eat, I am eating,
> > He eats, He is still eating, etc.
> > So should every venture in defining it
> > not take account of its aspects?
> >
> > Short of aspects, what is there to define?
> > Sophie
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: shun Tang <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 2:54 PM
> > Subject: How to define a 'present action'?
> >
> >
> > > Subject: How to define a 'present action'?
> > >
> > > A present action seems to be very basic knowledge, but it is most
> > puzzling.
> > > May someone kindly tell me, how to define a present action?
> > >
> > > Shun
> > > englishtense.com
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Geoff Layton" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 10:12 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Grammar and Literature -- Help Please
> > >
> > >
> > > > At 09:02 PM 6/14/01 -0400, you wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > Geoff,  I was under the impression that not all grammarians believed
> > that
> > > > grammar  instruction will improve writing, and that many of those
who
> > were
> > > > "consumed"  with the belief were reacting to the NCTE anti-grammar
> > stance.
> > > > At least  I don't have to defend it as writing process, which I know
> > will
> > > > get me in  trouble with the masses.
> > > >
> > > > I wanted to change that "consumed" line, but failed to do so.  I
guess
> I
> > > > was trying to get across the point that many people (like me), who
> think
> > > > grammar is important, can't quite accept the "anti-grammar"
position,
> > even
> > > > though years of research and in my case personal experience tell us
> > > > otherwise.  Peraps quixotically, I do want to defend grammar as
being
> > > > helpful to the writing process, all the while not getting myself in
> > > trouble
> > > > with "the masses."
> > > >
> > > > I have found that the only way to connect grammar with writing is to
> > > > de-emphasize the definitions and teach instead the usage and usage
in
> a
> > > > very particular way - namely, having my students learn how writers
> > create
> > > > meaning.  It seems to me that writers create meaning - and,
similarly,
> > > > readers create meaning from writing - only by using grammatical
> > > > constructions that can be taught, but do not necessarily have to be
> > named
> > > > and analyzed.  To continue with the tool analogy, you don't have to
> know
> > > > that a drill is called a drill in order to use it, although if you
use
> > one
> > > > enough you'll probably want to find out.
> > > >
> > > > This is where I have come up with what I call my "sentence stuffing"
> > idea
> > > > (I'm working on a book!) that requires students to use specific
> > > grammatical
> > > > constructs to create meaning - again, the "crying baby" sentence is
> the
> > > one
> > > > I start with.  Once a student gets going, all of a sudden dependent
> > > > clauses, prepositional phrases, appositives, adjectives and adverbs
> are
> > > > flying all over the place - all used correctly even by the most
> marginal
> > > > students.
> > > >
> > > > I now have hope that English teachers, just like the Washington
> > > > politicians, can finally stop our bickering and have a bipartisan
> > > agreement
> > > > on the value of grammar!
> > > >
> > > > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> > interface
> > > at:
> > > >      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > > > and select "Join or leave the list"
> > > >
> > > > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> > at:
> > >      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > > and select "Join or leave the list"
> > >
> > > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface
> at:
> >      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> >
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
>      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/