I have seen someone argues she prefers to use Will, rather than Shall, to denote future. May I know here how we can separate the future from the present?
Do you agree we may even use Will with the time adverb NOW?
Ex: She will be in the office now.
If so, really, how to separate the future from the present?
If you cannot define the future, isn't it too hurry to conclude we use Will, rather than Shall, to denote the future?
How to separate the future from the present?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
How to define the future? Is it "The future is separated from the present, of course, by a period of time, just as everyone knows." Then how long a period of time from the present is called the future?
Tomorrow? May be, and may be not.
Tonight? May be, and may be not.
Next minute? May be, and may be not.
In fact, no one knows. But because we cannot define the future, we may claim there is no future tense. I think this is a very loose judgment. We must try to define the future time, so that we may know if we have future tense or not.
May I ask how to define the future?
Tomorrow? May be, and may be not.
Tonight? May be, and may be not.
Next minute? May be, and may be not.
In fact, no one knows. But because we cannot define the future, we may claim there is no future tense. I think this is a very loose judgment. We must try to define the future time, so that we may know if we have future tense or not.
May I ask how to define the future?
I have a vague conception that, just because modal verbs express possibility, people would like to use Simple Present or Present Progressive to indicate the action is not a possibility. The latter tenses can imply that, though the sentence contains a future date like Tomorrow or Next Week, they are actually in progress because of agreement or arrangement. If we may define the 'future time', we may know if there is the future tense or not.
Indeed, most of my messages are known to grammarians, but from discussions I have further noticed that a future action can be not realized (I have explained 'realization' around here, and will recap it below.) If we skip the point that a future action can be not materialized, we may have assumed every future action will be done when the time arrives, then we cannot see the difference between a present action and a future action. The consequence is we may neglect a future action, and thus the future tense.
By realization, I mean a future action has become true or materialized in a future time, and most important, cannot be materialized at all because the action has been cancelled. For example, "They will come here next week" is realized in next week, by that time we know it materializes or not. A future action is possibly not materialized, so it has a difference from the present action.
But because my conception is now still vague, I am not able to explain the whole thing clearly to you. I think if we can define the future time, I may express a little better.
Indeed, most of my messages are known to grammarians, but from discussions I have further noticed that a future action can be not realized (I have explained 'realization' around here, and will recap it below.) If we skip the point that a future action can be not materialized, we may have assumed every future action will be done when the time arrives, then we cannot see the difference between a present action and a future action. The consequence is we may neglect a future action, and thus the future tense.
By realization, I mean a future action has become true or materialized in a future time, and most important, cannot be materialized at all because the action has been cancelled. For example, "They will come here next week" is realized in next week, by that time we know it materializes or not. A future action is possibly not materialized, so it has a difference from the present action.
But because my conception is now still vague, I am not able to explain the whole thing clearly to you. I think if we can define the future time, I may express a little better.
In another forum, we may even have a hard time to define the past time. If past time is "before now", we find that most present actions have started "before now":
Ex: I live in Hong Kong.
== I didn't start living here the time I say it. I have started it a long time "before now".
Therefore, "before now" is not the definition of the past time. Then how to define the past time?
Ex: I live in Hong Kong.
== I didn't start living here the time I say it. I have started it a long time "before now".
Therefore, "before now" is not the definition of the past time. Then how to define the past time?
In the following link a visitor has an interesting viewpoint about the future time and the past time:
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t144.htm
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t144.htm
-
JuanTwoThree
- Posts: 947
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
- Location: Spain
Sorry, I forgot to have reported I asked the questions in several forums, in pen names. The one that replied wasn't me.JuanTwoThree wrote:The two posters in your link have a very similar style to each other. They could almost have been written by the same person. What's more they both sound uncannily just like.... let me think for a moment.... it'll come to me soon.