Job Discussion Forums

[willy]

the woman_______ her children to the park every evening.

(1) will bring
(2) brings
(3) is bringing
(4) has brought

i have been fighting with a westerner for a week on this and would like more imput

[Guy Courchesne]

none of the above. I would use 'brings' (no e) to describe habitual behavior, shown by 'every evening'.

Will bring could work but is less likely?

[valley_girl]

All of the above. "Every evening" could indicate a habitual or a repeated action, in the past, present, or future.

[Sekhmet]

I agree with valley_girl.... All of them can work (assuming that the "e" in brings is a typo!!)
It's all about context - what is the tense of the sentence? It can work any way. You could also add "has been bringing", "was bringing", "did bring" and a whole multitude of others...
So, what did the "westerner" say, Willy?? What was the argument??

[Deconstructor]

The problem with your example is that a single sentence often doesn't provide enough context to determine the proper grammatical structures for it.

For example, it is possible to say:

1.The woman will bring her children to the park every evening from now on.

2.The woman has brought her children to the park every evening for a year.


3.Is bringing simply doesn't work because the context indicates every evening. This sentence, hence, provides adequate context to determine that is bringing is unacceptable.

4.There is no such English word as bringes. If it is a typo, then you can say, The woman brings her children to the park every evening.

This is a major problem in EFL/ESL classes as teachers provide simplistic and often inadequate contexts for their students for whom English grammar will forever remain a mystery.

PS-You've misspelled the title of your thread.

[willy]

ok no# 2 brings
is what i think he says all 4 are right and i say he doesn`t understand grammer

[The Red Baron]

Why worry about GRAMMAR, when your spelling doesn't matter.
I and 2 are best....3 and 4 are a bit stretched. Sounds a bit "Indian" "Oh, my goodness, yes. She is bringing her children to the park"

[Stephen Jones]

All four are correct provided the spelling mistake is corrected.

[Moore]

Hang on, "grammer" ?

[carnac]

Disagree with Deconstructor's 3rd point which is agreed upon by Red Baron. "Is bringing" is acceptable, as always depending on context.
"What's wrong with her?"
"Well, for one thing, she is bringing her children to the park every day when she should be working on her thesis!"
Arguably, the present simple is the more common usage, but the use of present progressive (continuous) emphasises the speaker's sense of wrongness in this instance. And it is not "Indian English".

Disagree most emphatically with Stephen Jones. "Never argue with a native speaker when he tells you something is correct. If he says it's correct, it's correct almost by definition. " Baloney, hooey, BS and shame on you! Any cursory reading of this forum will provide evidence of the correctness or lack thereof of "native-speakers" of English, especially considering that most posters are TEACHERS, for god's sake! (I have seen many examples of purported "teachers" asking questions about "grammer": Since they are native speakers, this means the spelling is correct, right?) It's fine if you restrict the statement to mean the teaching of variant forms of "correct" (within a linguistic group) English, but to say that "any" native speaker" [as in "a native speaker"]is always correct is simply wrong as well as arrogant. Sorry, Stephen, you get zero points on this one.
Additionally, I love it when students argue a point with me. It's another opportunity to teach something as well as evidence of the student's growing confidence. The alternative: stifle inquiry and investigation and learning. "I'm a native speaker, so shut up!"
Obviously, when this occurs, the teacher should know what s/he is talking about.
Otherwise, it becomes like Dad saying (remember?) "That's just the way it is!"
Sorry. This kind of attitude really irks me. "Irks me" is a euphemism.

[carnac]

willy -
All four examples can be correct (except the spelling) depending on the context. Always the context.

And you should believe me because I'm a native speaker. (joke )
- She brings...
- She is bringing
- She has brought...
- She brought...
- She had brought...
- She had been bringing
- She is going to bring...
- She will bring...
- She will have brought...
- She will have been bringing...

Also "The children are/were/were being brought"..etc, passives.

There are even two possible contexts for "She will bring".

Context, context, context.

[willy]

Ok ok give me a break on the spelling as I have said before Mr. J Walker is normally my assistant in the wee hours.

(She had been bringing) sounds to strange to me a little like (She had been knowing)
(She will have been bringing) nice one FUTURE PERFECT CONTINUOUS when was the last time you used that? Sounds like the Indian guy is back.

�I will have been knowing her for some time now�

Way too much grammar for me, and most of my students.

[Sekhmet]

I will have been teaching for 3 years next month...... Whats wrong with that??

[Stephen Jones]

Ok, Carnac, my comment was possibly too terse, so I'll go through your comments one by one.

[moonraven]

One of the many reasons I stopped hiring native speakers of English here in Mexico is that their English skills were very marginal, yet they believed that because they came from the US they were infallible.

What they really were: arrogant fracturers of the English language.

Stephen's arrogance at saying that native speakers are always correct is simply ludicrous.