[Grammar] Differences Between Tenses

[Reza_Rahimi]

Hi.
Could you please tell me about the difference between these two sentences?

1. I was amazed to hear that Chris had won first prize, and so had Tom.

2. I was amazed to hear that Chris won first prize, and so did Tom.

Also would you tell me about tense sequences?
I've read about it in books, but in practical English I see forms that none of those books mentioned.

 

[Tarheel]

They mean the same thing.

 

[ChinaDan]

I'm probably going to take it in the teeth from the real grammar experts aboard, but I believe...

1. Past Perfect.
2. Past Simple.

I further think there is some disagreement in the halls of academia about how many tenses there are in English, but if you can get a grasp on these 12, you've got most possibilities covered.

There are four common forms: simple, continuous (or progressive), perfect, perfect continuous.

There are three common tenses: past, present, future. Four times three gives you twelve.

I sometimes see reference to "future in the past". And I see expansions on types too. However, if you get the basic 12 figured out, you will be ready for most English forms you are likely to encounter.

 

[PaulMatthews]

I'm probably going to take it in the teeth from the real grammar experts aboard, but I believe...

1. Past Perfect.
2. Past Simple.

I further think there is some disagreement in the halls of academia about how many tenses there are in English, but if you can get a grasp on these 12, you've got most possibilities covered.

There are four common forms: simple, continuous (or progressive), perfect, perfect continuous. There are three common tenses: past, present, future. Four times three gives you twelve.

I sometimes see reference to "future in the past". And I see expansions on types too. However, if you get the basic 12 figured out, you will be ready for most English forms you are likely to encounter.

I think that is a potentially misleading way of putting things. I think it is better to say that English has two tense systems: an inflectional system contrasting preterite (past) and present, and an independent analytic past tense system called the 'perfect'.

English has no future tense, and 'progressive' is an aspect, not a tense

 

[ChinaDan]

I think that is a potentially misleading way of putting things. I think it is better to say that English has two tense systems: an inflectional system contrasting preterite (past) and present, and an independent analytic past tense system called the 'perfect'.

English has no future tense, and 'progressive' is an aspect, not a tense

Uh, no, not really. I think the basics are exactly what ESL students need to know. If they end up pursuing linguistics down the road, or just want to burrow into the intricacies of grammar for the sake of knowing that stuff, well, maybe then.

Seriously, I'm a native speaker, and highly competent. I've never heard of half of those things you talk about. I really question what purpose there is in knowing that stuff, except to be able to teach it to someone else for whom the only purpose in learning it is to be able to teach it....

 

[PaulMatthews]

Uh, no, not really. I think the basics are exactly what ESL students need to know. If they end up pursuing linguistics down the road, or just want to burrow into the intricacies of grammar for the sake of knowing that stuff, well, maybe then.

Seriously, I'm a native speaker, and highly competent. I've never heard of half of those things you talk about. I really question what purpose there is in knowing that stuff, except to be able to teach it to someone else for whom the only purpose in learning it is to be able to teach it....

The lack of a future tense in English is widely accepted. And you've never heard of the perfect tense?

 

[Rover_KE]

Reza_Rahimi is probably the latest punter to be left with their head swimming. He/she has made no response so far so I am moving the thread to a forum where fewer ESL students will find it and be left thinking 'Why bother learning English? It's much too complicated for me'.

 

[ChinaDan]

The lack of a future tense in English is widely accepted.

Paul, that's a BS statement. A branch of linguistics has all manner of fancy names and technical constructs, yada yada. That's great. I even get why you guys create that stuff. But that's just it! It is created as an academic exercise. Okay, have at it.

But there is a present, there is a past, and there is a future. Our verbs change to suit which we wish to speak about. And sure, it gets complicated. If something happened in the past, I don't really care if we call the verb form "past tense" or a "detached modality"; either way, it is a phrase which serves as a handle for discussing something occurring in the past.

Knowing the "widely accepted" phraseology has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on learning how to use English correctly. I could say it's called a "backward pass" - it wouldn't matter; it's only a label so others understand that we are talking about an event in the past, and how it affects the verb form used.

And you've never heard of the perfect tense?

Sarcasm; love it. :lol: And didn't you say "perfect" was a form, not a tense?

Actually, it was more like, "an inflectional system contrasting preterite" that I was referring to.

 

[Tdol]

Paul, that's a BS statement.

On this forum, please play the ball, not the player.

A branch of linguistics has all manner of fancy names and technical constructs, yada yada. That's great. I even get why you guys create that stuff. But that's just it! It is created as an academic exercise. Okay, have at it.

Actually, the idea that English has two tenses is not some arcane corner of linguistics- it is a view held by many. We also live in a world where people believe there is a future tense.

And didn't you say "perfect" was a form, not a tense?

It is actually an aspect to many, not a tense. The tense is the present/past bit. Some people use the term form when talking about, say, the different ways we can express future actions. I am leaving tomorrow could be a future form, but it is hard to make a case for it being a future tense.

Most of the people here have thought long and hard about language and care deeply about it and the learning process. Please show more respect and tolerance towards views that differ from yours. This is a discussion forum, not a place where someone can decide they can casually dismiss views as BS and scholarship as yada yada.