[Grammar] Talk to her Like a Person

[kadioguy]

(This article is quoted from Reader's Digest)

Talk to her Like a Person

The wheelchair mechanic knocks at the door. My husband, Justin, answers, and a hefty man wearing steel-toed shoes comes through our kitchen carrying a small tool box. It's 2016 and I'm in the living room, strapping orthotics on my five year old, Fiona. The mechanic stands beside her empty wheelchair, which is waiting in the dining room.

"Do you need anything from us?" I call out, pulling the laces of her shoe tight. "Just the passenger," he says gruffly. I hurry, and when Fiona is all laced up, I lift her to her feet and send her over. In a thump-thump rhythm of deliberate, confident steps, she walks to her wheelchair, a lean, glimmering machine custom made for her. She almost never uses it now that she walks, but when she needed it once this past year, her legs looked cramped. So the mechanic will tweak it.

He looks down past his belly to my one-metre-tall child. Although Fiona eats her weight in cheese, she's very thin and a head shorter than kids her age. "Hi there," he says in a pitch usually reserved for chihuahuas. I get up from the carpet. I'm going to have to do the thing. It's a thing I don't always even realise I'm doing in the moment, and yet I'm compelled to do it with regularity. I'm going to have to show someone that Fiona understands, that she's not a dog but a human.
.
.
.
Fiona and I have been visiting a lot of doctors and specialists lately. They demand chunks of time (sometimes full days), they cost petrol ( sometimes a half tank) and they cause stress ( sometimes immeasurable) as my husband and I figure out the logistics of who will pick up whom, and when and where; we also have a three-year old daughter. But they also cost the energy that goes into subtly advocating for Fiona. It's a bullet point in my job description.
.
.
.
The worst instance was a few weeks ago at another appointment. A doctor was assessing one of my daughter’s medical issues. She gazed down at Fiona, who stood directly in front of her, returning the gaze. Even though this doctor looked at my daughter, she still spoke to me. “I mean,” she started, “she’s a small, thin, weak…” Person, I thought. Say “person”. But instead the doctor said, “thing.”
.
.
.
-----------

As we can see, the red parts are in the present tense while the blue parts are in the past tense. I am not sure why. The red parts even happened a longer time ago. What do you think?

-----------
(Source)
https://i.imgur.com/2chk7Jl.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Eq7c0hN.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/NiUTgL3.jpg

 

[jutfrank]

Tell us why you think the writer may have chosen to make a transition from present to past tense at that point in the text.

 

[kadioguy]

Tell us why you think the writer may have chosen to make a transition from present to past tense at that point in the text.

I would think that the writer wanted to make the former paragraphs more vivid so she chose the present tense, and to make the latter paragraphs more authentic so she chose the past tense. :-?

 

[GoesStation]

I would think that the writer wanted to make the former paragraphs more vivid so she chose the present tense, and to make the latter paragraphs more authentic so she chose the past tense. :-?

Not exactly. The first section uses the present simple because that tense is appropriate for repeated, habitual events. The tense makes it clear that the incident is just one example of something that happens frequently; the details are different, but the essence is the same. The reader understands that the narrative is about a typical scene and imagines similar ones involving shoe salesmen, theater ushers, or other people interacting with her daughter.

She shifts to the past simple to describe the most egregious case she's experienced so far. Now the reader understands that this case is the one that prompted the author to write the story. It's not just one of many; it's the worst.

 

[kadioguy]

Not exactly. The first section uses the present simple because that tense is appropriate for repeated, habitual events. The tense makes it clear that the incident is just one example of something that happens frequently; the details are different, but the essence is the same. The reader understands that the narrative is about a typical scene and imagines similar ones involving shoe salesmen, theater ushers, or other people interacting with her daughter.

She shifts to the past simple to describe the most egregious case she's experienced so far. Now the reader understands that this case is the one that prompted the author to write the story. It's not just one of many; it's the worst.

There is a part omitted in post #1, which I now think will help. I mean, there is also a case which is in the past simple tense. How can we understand the past simple tense in this case?
-------------
.
.
.
Fiona and I have been visiting a lot of doctors and specialists lately. They demand chunks of time (sometimes full days), they cost petrol ( sometimes a half tank) and they cause stress ( sometimes immeasurable) as my husband and I figure out the logistics of who will pick up whom, and when and where; we also have a three-year old daughter. But they also cost the energy that goes into subtly advocating for Fiona. It's a bullet point in my job description.
.
.
.
"Does she show that she understands you?" the ear, nose and throat doctor asked me the other day while Fiona sat on my lap. He could have assessed her himself. She was, after all, right in front of him. Instead, he went through me. "If you ask her to do something, does she do it?"

"Yesss," I said, willing myself not to roll my eyes. I wondered what it must be like for my girl to have to hear this kind of talk about herself all the time. Minutes later, the doctor led us into a soundproof, white-walled room, so muffled that when I spoke, it felt like my ears had been stuffed with cotton. He sat on the other side of soundproof glass and asked Fiona to point to different parts of her face. She obliged happily for several minutes. When we exited the room and returned to his office, he declared in a loud, bombastic voice, "Well, she's not deaf!"

It was unbelievable. If he had realised what I'd already told him about my daughter, which is that she can hear and understand, then why was he still talking about her rather than to her'?

This happens all the time.

The worst instance was a few weeks ago at another appointment. A doctor was assessing one of my daughter’s medical issues. She gazed down at Fiona, who stood directly in front of her, returning the gaze. Even though this doctor looked at my daughter, she still spoke to me. “I mean,” she started, “she’s a small, thin, weak…” Person, I thought. Say “person”. But instead the doctor said, “thing.”
.
.
.

 

[kadioguy]

There is a part omitted in post #1, which I now think will help. I mean, there is also a case which is in the past simple tense. How can we understand the past simple tense in this case?

Could someone help me with this?

PS - I am willing to type all the article, if that will help you to answer the question about the tense uses in this article.

 

[Tarheel]

The author writes several paragraphs in the past simple. Why? She's talking about something that happened (in the past).

:-|

 

[kadioguy]

The author writes several paragraphs in the past simple. Why? She's talking about something that happened (in the past).

But what is confusing is that the author also writes several paragraphs in the present simple at the beginning of the article when she's talking about something that happened (in the past). :-?

 

[Tarheel]

OK. I'll look at that later. It's time for breakfast now.

 

[Tarheel]

I would have said:

She placed a foot on the footrest and tried to figure out how to get into the seat.

And so on and so forth. I see no particular reason to put that passage in present tense.

But I didn't write it. Maybe the writer wasn't aware that she was using present tense, then when she became aware of it she switched to past tense.

It's not worth losing sleep over.

 

[kadioguy]

Tell us why you think the writer may have chosen to make a transition from present to past tense at that point in the text.

Hi, jutfrank. I have told my opinion in post #3. If you don't mind, could you share yours with us?

It's not worth losing sleep over.

Thank you, Tarheel. You are right - it's my bedtime. ;-)

 

[GoesStation]

The present simple in the beginning tells the reader that the incident described is typical of incidents that happen regularly. The past simple in the rest of the text tells us that these are specific, probably more recent examples. You'll see this kind of writing a lot: the first part sets the scene, and the last part tells a specific story. In this case, the same kinds of incident are used in both parts.

 

[Tarheel]

Yes, but the writer was talking about a specific incident.
:-?

 

[GoesStation]

Yes, but the writer was talking about a specific incident.
:-?

True. A specific incident was used in the first part to set the scene in which the later incidents occurred. The present simple makes it a "scene-setting" passage; the past simple makes the rest of the text a story-telling narrative.

 

[jutfrank]

Hi, jutfrank. I have told my opinion in post #3. If you don't mind, could you share yours with us?

I am willing to type all the article, if that will help you to answer the question about the tense uses in this article.

Okay, if you're not satisfied with the other answers, go ahead and type out the full context, and then I'll offer my answer if you so wish.

 

[GoesStation]

Okay, if you're not satisfied with the other answers, go ahead and type out the full context, and then I'll offer my answer if you so wish.

What do you think of my "scene-setting" vs "story-telling" explanation?

 

[jutfrank]

What do you think of my "scene-setting" vs "story-telling" explanation?

I'm pretty sure you're on the money because I trust your expert analysis (of course ), but I think I should probably read the whole context before commenting further. For some reason, I can't seem to open the linked threads.

 

[kadioguy]

Okay, if you're not satisfied with the other answers, go ahead and type out the full context, and then I'll offer my answer if you so wish.

All members' comments are unique to me. I wouldn't say that I am not satisfied with the other answers; instead, I would say that I have expected your comment since post #3, which was posted to reply to you to some extent.

What do you think of my "scene-setting" vs "story-telling" explanation?

It sounds reasonable. :up:

 

[kadioguy]

Here is the full context. :roll:

-------

Talk to her Like a Person

The wheelchair mechanic knocks at the door. My husband, Justin, answers, and a hefty man wearing steel-toed shoes comes through our kitchen carrying a small tool box. It's 2016 and I'm in the living room, strapping orthotics on my five year old, Fiona. The mechanic stands beside her empty wheelchair, which is waiting in the dining room.

"Do you need anything from us?" I call out, pulling the laces of her shoe tight. "Just the passenger," he says gruffly. I hurry, and when Fiona is all laced up, I lift her to her feet and send her over. In a thump-thump rhythm of deliberate, confident steps, she walks to her wheelchair, a lean, glimmering machine custom-made for her. She almost never uses it now that she walks, but when she needed it once this past year, her legs looked cramped. So the mechanic will tweak it.

He looks down past his belly to my one-metre-tall child. Although Fiona eats her weight in cheese, she's very thin and a head shorter than kids her age. "Hi there," he says in a pitch usually reserved for chihuahuas.

I get up from the carpet. I'm going to have to do the thing. It's a thing I don't always even realise I'm doing in the moment, and yet I'm compelled to do it with regularity. I'm going to have to show someone that Fiona understands, that she's not a dog but a human.

My daughter, who has Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, a rare chromosomal deletion, is largely non-verbal, and the words she can say aren't usually intelligible to people who don't spend a lot of time with her. "Hat" is sometimes "ha." "Daddy" is "geggy." Strangers don't immediately know how to relate to her. They assume Fiona doesn't understand them. I often need to show them that she does. How do I do it? I use a normal voice. I talk to her like a person. I presume that she understands me, which she often does.

"All right, Fiona," I say, "go ahead and climb into your wheelchair." She places a leg on the footrest and tries to figure out how to get her body into the seat. With some assistance, she gets there. The mechanic notices that the footrest needs to be lowered. "Okay, honey." he says again in a high-pitched voice. "Let's have you come out."

But before she can stand on the footrest and lower herself down, he grabs her around the waist and pulls her out of her chair himself. I calculate that my methods have so far failed.

The footrest is the only thing to fix, so the mechanic is in and out, and my work as a parent is minimal. But it finally dawns on me how much invisible labour I do.

Fiona and I have been visiting a lot of doctors and specialists lately. They demand chunks of time (sometimes full days), they cost petrol ( sometimes a half tank) and they cause stress ( sometimes immeasurable) as my husband and I figure out the logistics of who will pick up whom, and when and where; we also have a three-year old daughter. But they also cost the energy that goes into subtly advocating for Fiona. It's a bullet point in my job description. In addition to my career as a writer and adjunct writing professor, I've got to make sure medical professionals speak to Fiona with respect so that she can preserve her sense of dignity. I've got to make sure they appreciate that she comprehends them.

"Does she show that she understands you?" the ear, nose and throat doctor asked me the other day while Fiona sat on my lap. He could have assessed her himself. She was, after all, right in front of him. Instead, he went through me. "If you ask her to do something, does she do it?"

"Yesss," I said, willing myself not to roll my eyes. I wondered what it must be like for my girl to have to hear this kind of talk about herself all the time. Minutes later, the doctor led us into a soundproof, white-walled room, so muffled that when I spoke, it felt like my ears had been stuffed with cotton. He sat on the other side of soundproof glass and asked Fiona to point to different parts of her face. She obliged happily for several minutes. When we exited the room and returned to his office, he declared in a loud, bombastic voice, "Well, she's not deaf!" It was unbelievable. If he had realised what I'd already told him about my daughter, which is that she can hear and understand, then why was he still talking about her rather than to her'?

This happens all the time.

The worst instance was a few weeks ago at another appointment. A doctor was assessing one of my daughter's medical issues. She gazed down at Fiona, who stood directly in front of her, returning the gaze. Even though this doctor looked at my daughter, she still spoke to me. "I mean," she started, "she's a small, thin, weak ... " Person, I thought. Say "person." But instead the doctor said, "thing."

A small, thin, weak thing. It's probably the last way I want my child to hear herself described.

Friends suggested I rage, call the doctor's boss, find another physician. But paediatric specialists are few and far between, and Fiona wouldn't have any other options.

My family and I often have to work with specific medical professionals, poor bedside manner or not. So a few weeks later, I called the doctor. I told her Fiona indeed can understand quite a lot. I quoted her back to herself: "small, thin, weak thing."

I said I didn't want my kid going through life hearing people describe her in those terms.

"I'm so sorry!" she said again, and I sensed she truly was. I asked her to be more mindful of her speech. "Of course." she said.

At the next visit, this doctor spoke directly to Fiona.

It's a taxing part of my job as the mother of a kid with disabilities. I shouldn't have to do it, but I do. One person at a time, through subtle cues or direct conversations, I try to teach people: my kid is a person. Just talk to her like a person.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I would think that the writer wanted to make the former paragraphs more vivid so she chose the present tense, and to make the latter paragraphs more authentic so she chose the past tense. :-?

That seems like a reasonable explanation to me.

I'd have to see the whole article to know what she's doing.