Shun,
I totally agree with what you've said.
I'd like to add that three things are essential
for making sense of verb tenses:
1. Context
2. Context
3. Context
José Santos
----- Original Message -----
From: shun Tang <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 12:05 AM
Subject: The main use of a tense
> Jeff,
>
> You wrote:
> > A single brick is essential to a brick building, but it is not useful
> (except for
> > sending messages through windows or holding down tarps) unless it is in
> the
> > companionship of mortar and other bricks.
> >
> My reply: This is a most sensible example. Likewise, a tense is essential
to
> a sentence, but it is not useful unless it is in the companionship of
other
> tenses/sentences. Tenses are used to connect the time between sentenceS,
> which I call paragraph. It is a fault to analyze a tense by way of a
single
> sentence, as most present-day grammars do.
>
> Present Perfect in one single sentence "I have bought many things" may
have
> implied a lot of meanings. We may spend days to explore its usage and
> implications, pondering how it is different to Simple Past "I bought many
> things". It is, however, like counting the use of a single brick.
> But there is no such thing in a paragraph (more than one sentence):
> Ex: Yesterday I saw a new department store open around my home. I bought
> many things from it.
> == Simple Past is compulsory, used to connect to the time of the former
> sentence. It is the true use of a tense. Likewise, the true use of a brick
> is seen in the companionship of other bricks. We may argue that a brick
can
> be sometimes used as a hammer, or sending messages through windows or
> holding down tarps, but at least we have to state its main use first as
you
> do.
>
> Nevertheless, since using many sentences to explain a tense seems
> troublesome, present-day grammars prefer to keep on one-sentence basis.
This
> is convenient, but results in more troublesome than they can imagine. They
> obviously miss the true use of tense.
>
> Shun
> englishtense.com
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Glauner, Jeff" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Verbs, tense, and existence
>
>
> > Jennifer,
> >
> > When you are studying grammar in this way, it is often more useful to
> think
> > in terms of phrases (subject, predicate, verb phrase, complement,
object,
> > modifier, and others) than words. Of course, these phrases are often
just
> > single words; but it is the phrase, more than the word, that provides
the
> > force behind effective sentence building. Beyond the sentence, it is
> often
> > the cohesion among phrases throughout the text that makes for powerful
> > construction. A single brick is essential to a brick building, but it
is
> > not useful (except for sending messages through windows or holding down
> > tarps) unless it is in the companionship of mortar and other bricks.
> >
> > And before anyone calls me heretic, let me assert that I am speaking
> > relatively. I know the impact of the perfect word. It is second only
to
> > that of "the well-turned phrase."
> >
> > Jeff Glauner
> > Associate Professor of English
> > Park University, Box 1303
> > 8700 River Park Drive
> > Parkville MO 64152
> > [log in to unmask]
> > http://www.park.edu/jglauner/index.htm
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jennifer Rabinowitz [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 10:45 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Verbs, tense, and existence
> >
> >
> > Brock,
> > In the process of trying to learn more about English grammar, I, like
> > you, have gravitated towards trying to discern more about how language
> > works and why. Learning about the rules of English grammar do not, in
> > themselves, satisfy my wish to understanding why the rules are as they
> > are. There seems to be a larger, superimposed, organic structure or
> > system of meaning--which your wonderings speak to directly. I really
> > have had such a tough time trying to learn grammar from the ground up,
> > that is, from a rule-oriented perspective! What is more to the point, I
> > believe, is to try to understanding the nature of the relationship
> > between words, and between words and thought, and then again between
> > words and physical reality--the dynamic between these things, that is.
> > I believe your comments, which I find so imaginative, are along the same
> > track of thinking.
> >
> > 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/
|
