Now
we strive to make clear a sentence from a tense. Needless to say, each of both has its own kind of duty to serve. (1)"The basic meaning of the simple past tense is
to denote definite past time..... It is found with adverbs referring to past time: I spoke to him last week."
A question about tenses (12): Sentence vs tense
But one may be prompt to ask, what are you talking about? Difference between a sentence and a tense? Everyone knows
that they are different!!
Or do we really so? In fact, we have seen frequently this confusion, and do not know or want to do anything about
it.
Generally, without exception, when a sentence expresses a meaning, grammars say the tense expresses it. Take a
look at some quotations from different sources:
(2)"The main use of the simple present tense is to express habitual actions. e.g. He smokes. Dogs
bark. Cats drink milk. Birds fly."
(3)"If you want to say that something is always or generally true, you use the simple present, e.g. Near
the equator, the sun evaporates greater quantities of water."
What do we see here? Grammars say that some tense denotes,
or expresses, or says some meaning. Clear enough. But don't you think we should instead say 'simple past tensed
sentence', or 'simple present tensed sentence', etc.?
Or perhaps they are explaining that, when the sentence expresses a habit, we use the present? If so, we use the
present tense to do what?
Or are they telling us the right thing: It is the tense alone that does the expression?
We don't know. It is advisable that we shall consult our own grammars first. Grammarians should spend some time
explaining between a tense and a sentence.
To tell the truth, when grammars say the present tense expresses a meaning, it is in fact the present tensed sentence
expresses the meaning. And more precisely, to our concern, it is the sentence alone that expresses the meaning.
The examples from grammars above will have the same meaning if rid of the tense, though it is hard for some people
to see through a tenseless sentence. In contrast, if we try to communicate with a tense only, without the sentence,
we will soon see how difficult it is. It is in fact impossible.
So we may see now, if we just say "the present tense expresses a permanency as in The earth moves around
the sun", everything turns topsy-turvy. We don't know what a tense is, and we don't know what a sentence
is.
Really, shall grammarians now start trying to define something, anything at all, about English tenses, for the
sakes of students? To tell the truth, it is for their own sakes.
=======================
No more Questions about English tenses are needed. I don't believe there is still any rule left in the current
tense system legitimately guiding people to use tenses, ones that we frequently use. I seriously hope that grammarians
should think up a new theory, a new explanation, which could at least avoid some or all the questions we put here.
WE KNOW THAT THERE IS NO FAULTLESS THING ON EARTH, BUT FEWER WEAK POINTS WILL MAKE A BETTER TENSE SYSTEM.
As for now, any new explanation, any one at all, will be much better than the existing one which we shall say is
very very misleading. As we have stated in "A
question about tense(9): Why jargons?", the
best a grammar book nowadays can do about tenses is to hope that students cannot see through their trick.
Finally, however, I must remind every lady or gentleman: Please correct me if I am wrong about any information.
Shun Tang
Please send your comments to [email protected]
It should be noted that your comments will be treated and answered with respect, in this homepage.
Related message: