[Grammar] [Mom asks Son] or [Mom is asking Son]

[kadioguy]

[Mom asks/is asking Son]

Mom: Have you eaten lunch?
Son: Yes, I have eaten lunch.
Mom: What did you eat?
Son: I ate a boxed lunch I bought.
Mom: Was it good?
Son: It wasn't bad.

(Adapted, by me, from https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/274988-Is-was-it-good?p=1538787&viewfull=1#post1538787)

----------

a. Mom asks Son
b. Mom is asking Son

In this context I think both can be used, but I can't tell the effect between (a) and (b). I assume that (a) means Mom starts to ask Son while (b) suggests this event is happening.

Do you have a better answer?

 

[jutfrank]

It seems to me that your sentence is meant not as a title but as a way to signal to the reader/listener who is talking to whom.

Use the present simple for this.

 

[kadioguy]

Neither is natural. If the words are supposed to be a title, then I'd say A mother talks to her son about his lunch.

It seems to me that your sentence is meant not as a title but as a way to signal to the reader/listener who is talking to whom.

Use the present simple for this.

Could you tell me what different effect exists between the present simple and the present progress here?

I asked the original question because I saw the following. As you can see, the present progress is used.

----
(Quoted from a senior high school reader in Taiwan)

 

[jutfrank]

Using the progressive aspect encourages the reader to imagine the situation described as being in progress.

 

[kadioguy]

Using the progressive aspect encourages the reader to imagine the situation described as being in progress.

Thank you, jutfrank.

1.
I assume if using the progressive aspect [A mom is asking her son], the reader won't read the complete conversation because that means it hasn't finished yet.

2.
Can the following explain the effect?

----------
Practical English Usage 3rd ed. (465.2)

In commentaries, the use of tenses is similar. The simple present is used for the quicker actions and events (which are finished before the sentences that describe them); the present progressive is used for longer actions and situations. There are more simple and fewer progressive tenses in a football commentary, for instance, than in a commentary on a boat race.

Smith passes to Devaney, Devaney to Barnes - and Harris intercepts ... Harris passes back to Simms, nice ball - and Simms shoots!

Oxford are pulling slightly ahead of Cambridge now; they're rowing with a beautiful rhythm; Cambridge are looking a little disorganised ...
​

 

[jutfrank]

1. No, that's completely wrong. It doesn't mean that at all.

2. There is some essential relation, but no. This is not a commentary in the sense that Swan means there.

You're not thinking about this in the right way, in my opinion. First of all, you'd do better to focus on the use of this sentence.

With the example in post #1, it seems that the use of the sentence in question is simply a way to tell the reader that a dialogue will follow, and what the dynamics of that dialogue will be. That's a very specific use, so don't try to generalise it. Present simple is sufficient for this.

I sometimes write short dramatic plays, and I also use the present simple in this way (also enclosed in square brackets), when I want to let the reader know very quickly and simply about the upcoming dialogue.

Another factor that's complicating this question I think is the kinds of verbs used. We use the progressive aspect much more readily when the action signified by the verb is conceived as being progressive. The verb ask is not very good for this because we don't tend to think of asking as a very progressive action.

 

[kadioguy]

1. No, that's completely wrong. It doesn't mean that at all.

Thank you for your kind reply.

So do you think in the reader in the post #4, the present simple, rather than the present progressive, should be used?

2. There is some essential relation, but no. This is not a commentary in the sense that Swan means there.

How about this one?

PEU 3rd ed. 465.1

Present tenses are often used informally to tell stories. The simple present is used for the events - the things that happen one after another. The present progressive is used for 'background' - things that are already happening when the story starts, or that continue through the story.

So I open the door, and I look out into the garden, and I see this man. He's wearing pyjamas and a policeman's helmet. 'Hello,' he says ...

There's this Scotsman, you see, and he's walking through the jungle when he meets a gorilla. And the gorilla's eating a snake sandwich. So the Scotsman goes up to the gorilla ...
​

The simple present is common in summaries of plays, stories, etc.

In Act I, Hamlet sees the ghost of his father. The ghost tells him ...

Chapter 2: Henry goes to Scotland and meets the Loch Ness Monster.

[Cross-posted with jutfrank]​

 

[jutfrank]

Thank you for your kind reply.

You're welcome. :-D

So do you think in the reader in the post #4, the present simple, rather than the present progressive, should be used?

No, I think the progressive is better. It works better to let the reader imagine the situation.

How about this one?

PEU 3rd ed. 465.1

Present tenses are often used informally to tell stories. The simple present is used for the events - the things that happen one after another. The present progressive is used for 'background' - things that are already happening when the story starts, or that continue through the story.

So I open the door, and I look out into the garden, and I see this man. He's wearing pyjamas and a policeman's helmet. 'Hello,' he says ...

There's this Scotsman, you see, and he's walking through the jungle when he meets a gorilla. And the gorilla's eating a snake sandwich. So the Scotsman goes up to the gorilla ...
​

The simple present is common in summaries of plays, stories, etc.

In Act I, Hamlet sees the ghost of his father. The ghost tells him ...

Chapter 2: Henry goes to Scotland and meets the Loch Ness Monster.

[Cross-posted with jutfrank]​

What's your question exactly?

 

[kadioguy]

Now I think I have got it. Please let me make a conclusion.

1. The reasons for why the present simple is appropriate to the conversation in post #1:

(1) It's a simple way to tell the reader that a dialogue will follow, and what the dynamics of that dialogue will be. That is, to let the reader know very quickly and simply about the upcoming dialogue.

(2) The verb ask is not very good for the present progressive because we don't tend to think of asking as a very progressive action.

2. The reason for why the present progressive is appropriate to the two conversations in post #4: To let the reader imagine the situation.