|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:30 pm Post subject: hypothetical situation (verb tense question) |
 |
|
Can someone please confirm the correct tenses for the two blanks below?
To be grammatically correct, is there only 1 possible tense for both blanks?
I seem to be finding conflicting information...
What would you do if you saw a car accident and a man was hurt?
First, I would call 911. Then, I would try to keep him calm until the ambulance _______. (come) When the ambulance ______ (arrive), I would tell the paramedics everything I knew.
Thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| came, arrived |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raewon
Joined: 16 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for your reply. I thought the past should be used as well,
but a native speaker said the present should be used (comes/arrives),
especially in the 'when' clause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grammatically, they should both be past tense, but in regular conversation, I would suspect many switch to present tense (even with "would"), with no confusion resulting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
a native speaker said the present should be used (comes/arrives),
especially in the 'when' clause. |
"When the ambulance arrives, I would tell the paramedics everything you know." (Someone else speaking to you)
In this case, you are waiting for the paramedics and someone thinks you don't want to tell them everything you know (maybe you know your spouse was in an argument with the victim and they might use this against them later on).
In the example you gave, you are stating a hypothetical that isn't going to happen in the near future. The example I gave illustrates something that is more likely to happen, and in that case you would use present tense. Depends on the context.
Textbooks will say to use past tense to make it simple, but there is gray area. It's not just a slip of the tongue without thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YTMND wrote: |
| Quote: |
a native speaker said the present should be used (comes/arrives),
especially in the 'when' clause. |
"When the ambulance arrives, I would tell the paramedics everything you know." (Someone else speaking to you)
In this case, you are waiting for the paramedics and someone thinks you don't want to tell them everything you know (maybe you know your spouse was in an argument with the victim and they might use this against them later on).
In the example you gave, you are stating a hypothetical that isn't going to happen in the near future. The example I gave illustrates something that is more likely to happen, and in that case you would use present tense. Depends on the context.
Textbooks will say to use past tense to make it simple, but there is gray area. It's not just a slip of the tongue without thinking. |
In the example you gave, the conditional is actually "If I were you, I would tell the paramedics everything you know when the ambulance arrives" but the first part is left unsaid. That's why "would" is used in that sentence, and so it doesn't relate to the likelihood of the ambulance arriving or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| raewon wrote: |
Thanks for your reply. I thought the past should be used as well,
but a native speaker said the present should be used (comes/arrives),
especially in the 'when' clause. |
You were correct in your thinking.
The native speaker gave you some not so good advice.
'Could' be used...possibly.
'Should' be used...not in the original context.
As you mentioned it was a hypothetical...the past tense is correct usage for that context.
To make the present tense more applicable, you would need to make a few changes (ie. would- will/knew - know)
It would no longer be strictly hypothetical.
Of course, any change in context will allow for numerous answers to become possible.
But again, as for the original...the past tense is most appropriate and the present tense is inappropriate.
Perhaps you could ask the native speaker why they think the present tense is correct...especially in the dependent clause?
The position of the dependent clause does not influence the verb.
When the ambulance arrived, I would tell the paramedics everything (that) I knew.
I would tell the paramedics everything (that) I knew when the ambulance arrived.
(all past tense/hypothetical markers.)
There are just too many indicators suggesting that the present tense would create an awkward construction given the original context.
Hope this is useful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troglodyte
Joined: 06 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Both can be correct. It is just a matter of how hypothetical or likely the situation and your response to the situation would be.
Since it's clearly meant to be a hypothetical situation, the past tense seems more appropriate.
BUT if this question was asked to someone who is very likely to be in such a situation, then they may use the present simple to state a simple fact. In other words although the questioner may consider it a hypothetical question, the person answering is so sure of his response (and likely feels that the situation will indeed occur eventually) that they can use the present simple - correctly. The question may be hypothetical, but that doesn't mean that the answer also has to be, in part or in whole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| transmogrifier wrote: |
| YTMND wrote: |
| Quote: |
a native speaker said the present should be used (comes/arrives),
especially in the 'when' clause. |
"When the ambulance arrives, I would tell the paramedics everything you know." (Someone else speaking to you)
In this case, you are waiting for the paramedics and someone thinks you don't want to tell them everything you know (maybe you know your spouse was in an argument with the victim and they might use this against them later on).
In the example you gave, you are stating a hypothetical that isn't going to happen in the near future. The example I gave illustrates something that is more likely to happen, and in that case you would use present tense. Depends on the context.
Textbooks will say to use past tense to make it simple, but there is gray area. It's not just a slip of the tongue without thinking. |
In the example you gave, the conditional is actually "If I were you, I would tell the paramedics everything you know when the ambulance arrives" but the first part is left unsaid. That's why "would" is used in that sentence, and so it doesn't relate to the likelihood of the ambulance arriving or not. |
In the example you gave, the conditional is actually "If I were you, I would yadda yadda yadda"
That is not entirely clear to me. We get so fixated on one line of interpretation. The ESL books may say one fixed rule for one grammar point because it is common ground for the native speaker and student to use those words.
In the example I gave I would have translated it to or understood it more like "You should yadda yadda yadda" not "If I were you yadda yadda yadda". In this case it's not really a hypothetical.
"Should is usually replaced, nowadays, by would. It is still used, however, to mean "ought to" as in" - http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/auxiliary.htm
Don't get me wrong, I take notes every day and compare them to the ESL world's established practice of teaching English. However, if a student is capable and likely to study abroad, we need to teach beyond the books' cookie cutter rules and regulations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
transmogrifier
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YTMND wrote: |
| However, if a student is capable and likely to study abroad, we need to teach beyond the books' cookie cutter rules and regulations. |
Oh, of course, you don't get any argument from me. But there are grammar rules, and the OP asked about them. That's all. And so for your example, I just followed on from that (i.e. explaining from a grammatical standpoint why the use of "would" in your example was acceptable, even with another verb there in present tense)
I generally teach to the "rules" for lower level students, so that they feel that they have some control over the formation of sentences, and it does help to give them that confidence to start communicating and exploring language further.
For an advanced student, I wouldn't care that they are mixing "would" and present tense in much the same way that I don't care when native speakers do it, nor when I do it myself. Usually the likelihood of the event under discussion is already clear from the context, and thus the use of tense much more fluent and idiosyncratic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alljokingaside
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"First, I would call 911. Then, I would try to keep him calm until the ambulance _______. (come) When the ambulance ______ (arrive), I would tell the paramedics everything I knew."
It really won't matter to a native speaker. That said,
1. First, I would call 911. Then, I would try to keep him calm until the ambulance _______. (came) When the ambulance ______ (arrived), I would tell the paramedics everything I knew.
2. First, I [will] call 911. Then, I [will] try to keep him calm until the ambulance _______. (comes) When the ambulance ______ (arrives), I [will] tell the paramedics everything I knew. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troglodyte
Joined: 06 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
It doesn't have to be totally hypothetical or totally not. You can combine the two in the same sentence.
I would try to keep him calm..... [hypothetical] ...until the ambulance came. [continuing on from the thought process of the previous hypothetical statement]
I would try to keep him calm... [hypothetical] ... until the ambulance comes. [I'm 100% sure that the ambulance will come. It's a separate fact.] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't this thread predicated on the grammar point in the thread title, which states that this is a hypothetical situation?
Then with this knowledge...the correct answers would be past tense.
Regardless of how the 'speaker' may feel about the certainty of any event...there is no event...it is hypothetical.
To answer this as a hypothetical test question...given the context and information at hand...the past tense is the correct answer.
That being said...if this is just will either answer do in natural conversation between two native speakers who don't much care about the grammar involved?...then sure...why not?
As mentioned earlier...change the parameters and get creative with the context and just about any answer will do.
What is interesting is why the native speaker (mentioned by the OP) chose to single out the dependent clause in the second sentence.
Dependent clause, independent clause.
But made no mention of the dependent clause in the first sentence.
Independent clause + dependent clause.
Again...it could just be advice gone wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What is interesting is why the native speaker (mentioned by the OP) chose to single out the dependent clause in the second sentence. |
I doubt that native speaker understood it only as a hypothetical. When people come up to me and ask me, "Is this answer right?" I don't look at only the context the answer is supposed to be determined by.
The reason for this is that if you tell a student to only use past, then they will go off thinking that present is to never be allowed (BUT THE NATIVE SPEAKER SAID PAST!!!).
If this were a courthouse and we were to strictly follow only 1 context, then sure I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troglodyte
Joined: 06 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Cosmic Hum wrote: |
Isn't this thread predicated on the grammar point in the thread title, which states that this is a hypothetical situation?
Then with this knowledge...the correct answers would be past tense.
Regardless of how the 'speaker' may feel about the certainty of any event...there is no event...it is hypothetical.
To answer this as a hypothetical test question...given the context and information at hand...the past tense is the correct answer.
That being said...if this is just will either answer do in natural conversation between two native speakers who don't much care about the grammar involved?...then sure...why not?
As mentioned earlier...change the parameters and get creative with the context and just about any answer will do.
What is interesting is why the native speaker (mentioned by the OP) chose to single out the dependent clause in the second sentence.
Dependent clause, independent clause.
But made no mention of the dependent clause in the first sentence.
Independent clause + dependent clause.
Again...it could just be advice gone wrong. |
Even if it's hypothetical, it still depends on how it's viewed by the speaker. In one context, the speaker's actions can be considered hypothetical while the arrival of ambulances is an undisputable fact. If the arrival of an ambulance is considered a given fact, i.e. something that is guaranteed to happen because it always happens that way (at least in the mind of the speaker) then simple present should be used - even though the speakers actions are less of a given and require the past tense (for a hypothetical reaction to the situation). Or the arrival of an ambulance can be linked to the hypothetical reaction of the speaker (i.e. keeping the guy calm and telling the paramedics everything). The two can be considered as a whole. In this case you'd use the paste tense for the ambulance arriving. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
