- Joined
- Oct 14, 2010
- Member Type
- English Teacher
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- Czech Republic
- Current Location
- Czech Republic
Tense and Aspect: 3. The Marked Tense - Part One
3.1. Traditional 'Rules'
This tense, the traditional ‘past simple’, sometimes referred to as the preterit(e)https://d.docs.live.net/9046edaeb9e7aadb/Documents/UE marked tense.docx#_edn1, like the unmarked tense, can refer to past, present, future and general time. Typical lists in English grammars of uses of the tense include such uses as:
As with the unmarked tense, it is true that the uses of the marked tense can be described in such ways as those noted, but such descriptions are not very helpful for the learner.
3.2. The Marked 'Rule'
AI believe that simple 'rule' that covers all uses of the marked form is:
We use the marked form when we wish to distance the situation - in vividness/time, reality, or directness.
3.2.1. Distancing[ii] in Vividness/Time
As we saw in an earlier thread, it is perfectly normal for a speaker to describe a past situation using the unmarked form:
§2.6. Then this chap just walks up to me and punches me.
The fact that the speaker has chosen not to distance the situation (which speaker and listener know from the context is distanced in time) makes the situation real, vivid. In historic narrative and magazine articles the speaker/writer similarly chooses not to distance the situation. It is presented as something real and vivid, brought closer to us by the lack of distancing:
It is not the tense of the verb that shows us the time but such factors as explicit time markers [8] or the shared knowledge that the situation described occurred in the past [9]. With no context provided, an utterance such as:
having no tense marking to show distancing, implies that the situation is not distanced, i.e., is true now (as it was for some unspecified time in the past and will be for some unspecified time in the future). However, if a context is known or provided, as when an old man is talking of his youth and says:
10a. We both want kids, but we live in a one room flat in Bootle with her mother, so...
then it is clear that a past-time situation is being described; the speaker has chosen not to distance it in vividness.
What is past, even a few moments ago, is often viewed as past, finished, done with. It is therefore common for speakers/writers to use the marked (distancing) form of the verb to describe past situations, but it is not essential, as we have seen. The speaker/writer has the free choice: to distance or not to distance. One might well consider this as Grammar as Choice[iii]. Without explicit or implicit context, the use of the marked tense does not of itself imply past time; and describing past time does not necessarily involve the use of the unmarked tense.
The distribution of present and past tense verbs differs considerably across registers[iv] . As we might expect, the former is more common in conversation and academic prose, the latter in fiction[v].
https://d.docs.live.net/9046edaeb9e7aadb/Documents/UE marked tense.docx#_ednref1 e.g., Kruisinga ([1911] 1931.22), Jespersen ((1931.7), Huddleston (1995.102)
[ii] Some writers use the word ‘remote(ness)’ rather than the ‘distancing’ that I prefer, e.g., Kruisinga ([1911] 1931.25), Lewis (1986.68-73, 160), Yule (1999.5), Huddleston (2002.148-9).
Chalker (1984.98) uses both distancing and remote. Joos, Martin (1964.121): The unmarked tense will be called actual and the marked one remote. The modern English remote tense has the categorical meaning that the referent (what is specified by the subject-verb partnership) is absent from that part of the real world where the verb is being spoken. [...] remoteness in time in English is always categorically past time. This is one English kind of remoteness. [...] the other kind [is] unreality. The modern English remote tense has exactly the same form, no matter whether the meaning is unreality or past reality. For Yule (1998.59), the basic concept of the present tense is non remote + factual that of the past tense denoting remoteness in time is remote + factual; that of the past tense denoting hypothetical situations (remoteness in reality) is remote + non-factual.
[iii] Close (1992. 1-2) presented the idea of Grammar as Choice (for example the selection of a particular tense or aspect for an utterance) as opposed to Grammar of Fact (for example the fact that the plural of CHILD is CHILDREN, not *CHILDS). As Lewis (in Close, 1992.v) pointed out, there are many situations in English where the language user has a choice between two possible 'right' sentences, in the sense of grammatically well-formed, but where each has a slightly different meaning.
I differ from Lewis only in believing that there are often more than two possible 'right' sentences. In these threads, the idea that the speaker chooses one particular verb form rather than any other within each context of situation underlies much of what is written. It might well be that in any tightly defined context of situation most native speakers would make a similar or even identical choice of words; however, we cannot normally give 'rules' for what must be said.
[iv] Biber et al (1999.456)
[v] Biber et al (1999.457-8) suggest that the preference for present tense verbs in conversation reflects
speakers’ general focus on the immediate context […]. Academic prose, on the other hand, uses the present tense not so much to focus on the immediate context as to imply a lack of time restriction, with the present subsuming past and future time.
[…]
… fiction writers use past tense verbs much more frequently than present tense verbs. In fact, many fictional narratives are written entirely in the past tense […] with present tense verbs being used only in the direct speech attributed to fictional characters.
I suggest that the preference of fiction writers for marked tense stems from the concept of distancing in time; the situations reported are clearly presented as actualizing before the present time, even for science-fiction novels set in the future from the reader’s point of view, but in the past from the writer’s point of view.
The distribution of the tenses is more even in the register of news. The relative frequency of the unmarked tense in headlines presents the situation vividly to attract readers’ attention. In the actual reports, the unmarked tense/aspect-forms are normally used for ongoing situations, marked forms for past-time situations.
Continued here: https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/287495-Tense-and-Aspect-3-The-Marked-Tense-Part-2
3.1. Traditional 'Rules'
This tense, the traditional ‘past simple’, sometimes referred to as the preterit(e)https://d.docs.live.net/9046edaeb9e7aadb/Documents/UE marked tense.docx#_edn1, like the unmarked tense, can refer to past, present, future and general time. Typical lists in English grammars of uses of the tense include such uses as:
- Single action in the past: Emma woke up at 6.30.
- Continuous or repeated actions in the past: I played football twice a week when I was at school.
- State in the past: Peter was ill for the last ten years of his life.
- Polite conversation marker (present or future): Excuse me. I wondered if you were free now.
- Present regret: I wish I had a job that paid more.
- Hypothetical future (viewed as not very probable): If I didn't get my degree next year, my father would be very disappointed.
- Counterfactual Present: I wish my parents were here to see this.
As with the unmarked tense, it is true that the uses of the marked tense can be described in such ways as those noted, but such descriptions are not very helpful for the learner.
3.2. The Marked 'Rule'
AI believe that simple 'rule' that covers all uses of the marked form is:
We use the marked form when we wish to distance the situation - in vividness/time, reality, or directness.
3.2.1. Distancing[ii] in Vividness/Time
As we saw in an earlier thread, it is perfectly normal for a speaker to describe a past situation using the unmarked form:
§2.6. Then this chap just walks up to me and punches me.
The fact that the speaker has chosen not to distance the situation (which speaker and listener know from the context is distanced in time) makes the situation real, vivid. In historic narrative and magazine articles the speaker/writer similarly chooses not to distance the situation. It is presented as something real and vivid, brought closer to us by the lack of distancing:
- 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] September 1939. 11 o'clock. Millions of people all over Britain gather anxiously round their radio sets. The strained voice of the Prime Minister comes across the air: "I have to tell you ...."
- The Chancellor smiles almost ruefully as I pose the question. “Policies are more important than people," he begins, but we both know that voters disagree.
It is not the tense of the verb that shows us the time but such factors as explicit time markers [8] or the shared knowledge that the situation described occurred in the past [9]. With no context provided, an utterance such as:
- We live in a one-room flat in Bootle,
having no tense marking to show distancing, implies that the situation is not distanced, i.e., is true now (as it was for some unspecified time in the past and will be for some unspecified time in the future). However, if a context is known or provided, as when an old man is talking of his youth and says:
10a. We both want kids, but we live in a one room flat in Bootle with her mother, so...
then it is clear that a past-time situation is being described; the speaker has chosen not to distance it in vividness.
What is past, even a few moments ago, is often viewed as past, finished, done with. It is therefore common for speakers/writers to use the marked (distancing) form of the verb to describe past situations, but it is not essential, as we have seen. The speaker/writer has the free choice: to distance or not to distance. One might well consider this as Grammar as Choice[iii]. Without explicit or implicit context, the use of the marked tense does not of itself imply past time; and describing past time does not necessarily involve the use of the unmarked tense.
The distribution of present and past tense verbs differs considerably across registers[iv] . As we might expect, the former is more common in conversation and academic prose, the latter in fiction[v].
https://d.docs.live.net/9046edaeb9e7aadb/Documents/UE marked tense.docx#_ednref1 e.g., Kruisinga ([1911] 1931.22), Jespersen ((1931.7), Huddleston (1995.102)
[ii] Some writers use the word ‘remote(ness)’ rather than the ‘distancing’ that I prefer, e.g., Kruisinga ([1911] 1931.25), Lewis (1986.68-73, 160), Yule (1999.5), Huddleston (2002.148-9).
Chalker (1984.98) uses both distancing and remote. Joos, Martin (1964.121): The unmarked tense will be called actual and the marked one remote. The modern English remote tense has the categorical meaning that the referent (what is specified by the subject-verb partnership) is absent from that part of the real world where the verb is being spoken. [...] remoteness in time in English is always categorically past time. This is one English kind of remoteness. [...] the other kind [is] unreality. The modern English remote tense has exactly the same form, no matter whether the meaning is unreality or past reality. For Yule (1998.59), the basic concept of the present tense is non remote + factual that of the past tense denoting remoteness in time is remote + factual; that of the past tense denoting hypothetical situations (remoteness in reality) is remote + non-factual.
[iii] Close (1992. 1-2) presented the idea of Grammar as Choice (for example the selection of a particular tense or aspect for an utterance) as opposed to Grammar of Fact (for example the fact that the plural of CHILD is CHILDREN, not *CHILDS). As Lewis (in Close, 1992.v) pointed out, there are many situations in English where the language user has a choice between two possible 'right' sentences, in the sense of grammatically well-formed, but where each has a slightly different meaning.
I differ from Lewis only in believing that there are often more than two possible 'right' sentences. In these threads, the idea that the speaker chooses one particular verb form rather than any other within each context of situation underlies much of what is written. It might well be that in any tightly defined context of situation most native speakers would make a similar or even identical choice of words; however, we cannot normally give 'rules' for what must be said.
[iv] Biber et al (1999.456)
[v] Biber et al (1999.457-8) suggest that the preference for present tense verbs in conversation reflects
speakers’ general focus on the immediate context […]. Academic prose, on the other hand, uses the present tense not so much to focus on the immediate context as to imply a lack of time restriction, with the present subsuming past and future time.
[…]
… fiction writers use past tense verbs much more frequently than present tense verbs. In fact, many fictional narratives are written entirely in the past tense […] with present tense verbs being used only in the direct speech attributed to fictional characters.
I suggest that the preference of fiction writers for marked tense stems from the concept of distancing in time; the situations reported are clearly presented as actualizing before the present time, even for science-fiction novels set in the future from the reader’s point of view, but in the past from the writer’s point of view.
The distribution of the tenses is more even in the register of news. The relative frequency of the unmarked tense in headlines presents the situation vividly to attract readers’ attention. In the actual reports, the unmarked tense/aspect-forms are normally used for ongoing situations, marked forms for past-time situations.
Continued here: https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/287495-Tense-and-Aspect-3-The-Marked-Tense-Part-2
Last edited:
