Yes I do, and so do a lot of other people. For example, when a hotel receptionist asks a customer "What was your name again?", he or she is using Past Simple to express a remoteness (in this case formality) at the time of speaking (i.e. the present time). Past Continuous can be used in the same way e.g. I might telephone someone and say "I was calling to find out what time you were arriving" (even though I'm calling now and the other person is arriving tomorrowMay I ask, do you use Simple Past also to say a present remoteness? I really don't think so. Do you?
now
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Although time in the future is also remote, the use of remote verb forms expresses remote facts (in the user's eyes, of course). Therefore, future remoteness is excluded because, as we all know, future events cannot be seen as factual. (The only exception to that is in situations where the event in question is a scheduled event--such as an airline flight or a bus departure time--which occurs routinely, so that the user has good reason to expect that the event is a pre-determined fact. This allows for sentences like: "The flight leaves tomorrow at 9 o'clock." Remoteness is not involved here, but future factuality is.)
Larry Latham
Larry Latham
To me, the sentence "The flight leaves tomorrow at 9 o'clock" indicates a schedule, while the tense says the schedule is not finished by now. In simple words, the schedule is still valid.LarryLatham wrote:Although time in the future is also remote, the use of remote verb forms expresses remote facts (in the user's eyes, of course). Therefore, future remoteness is excluded because, as we all know, future events cannot be seen as factual. (The only exception to that is in situations where the event in question is a scheduled event--such as an airline flight or a bus departure time--which occurs routinely, so that the user has good reason to expect that the event is a pre-determined fact. This allows for sentences like: "The flight leaves tomorrow at 9 o'clock." Remoteness is not involved here, but future factuality is.)
Larry Latham
Larry you prefer to use terms such as fact, remote, and schedule here. That is why I have been joking, English is a language that doesn't have tenses to express time. But you shall not take it as a joke, but a fact. Am I correct?
One most important thing, you have mentioned above: "remote verb forms". Where did it come from? From Lewis' book or, of course, you may create anything. Can you tell me more about "remote verb forms"? Please don't avoid this question.
Shun Tang
Last edited by shuntang on Tue May 25, 2004 9:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Yes, for me at least, "remote verb forms" is a concept I have learned at Michael Lewis' knee, from his book, The English Verb. The book describes "remoteness" in English grammar better than I could ever hope to.
I suggest you read the book. If you already have, then I suggest you read it again. And when you do, read it with great respect for its author. He is not a man who makes offhand commentary about the grammar of English. He is indeed a brilliant man who has thought long and hard about his subject.
Larry Latham
I suggest you read the book. If you already have, then I suggest you read it again. And when you do, read it with great respect for its author. He is not a man who makes offhand commentary about the grammar of English. He is indeed a brilliant man who has thought long and hard about his subject.
Larry Latham
As you say so, I will check it in the library soon. Please be understood that you clearly said the term is not your invention. Am I correct?LarryLatham wrote:Yes, for me at least, "remote verb forms" is a concept I have learned at Michael Lewis' knee, from his book, The English Verb. The book describes "remoteness" in English grammar better than I could ever hope to.
I suggest you read the book. If you already have, then I suggest you read it again. And when you do, read it with great respect for its author. He is not a man who makes offhand commentary about the grammar of English. He is indeed a brilliant man who has thought long and hard about his subject.
Larry Latham
The term "remote verb forms" is from Lewis' The English Verb. Am I correct? Can you tell me which page it is? Thank you very much.
Shun Tang
Lolwhites,
Even so, the case can be explained even without formality. It happens many times a day. I asked someone, "What IS your name, please?" Next moment I forgot the name, so I had to ask again, "What WAS your name again?" In this case, I was pointing out you DID tell me the name, but I forgot and wanted to ask again what WAS the name you had told me.
As you see, when the real world does not permit us to say in Simple Present "What IS your name, please?", we then have to build up something to explain it, maybe the remoteness theory.
--------------------
As for the coming arrival, I would like to say ".....what time you ARE arriving". Again, when the real world won't permit me to say this, I will turn to another plan, maybe the remoteness theory.
--------------------
YOUR EXAMPLES WILL DEEPLY HURT ONLY REMOTENESS THEORY
I really don't know how you define remoteness. It seems to me, after I have used Simple Past, it is then explained as remote. It is not because I have found it remote that I use Simple Past. I don't find your cases remote at all.
-- In the case of asking for name, I ask for your name when I need it right now, how can it be remote? Physically or psychologically, it is not remote at all. Therefore, it is not because of remoteness that we use past tense. You can trick a student, a very young one, but not us here.
-- In the telephone case here, our conversion is near. Very near. It is not remote at all. Therefore, WAS CALLING is not related to any remoteness. However, without remoteness, it can be explained correctly by conventional theory of time.
-- Talking about time, again, as time is running fast, the moment you ACHIEVE something, SAYING the achievement, though instantly, can be comparatively a past: "Great! We did it!!!". This can only be explained by comparison of time. It is much more reasonable than explaining the achievement as remote. In all aspects, it is not remote.
As you have regarded the cases above as remoteness, please explain HOW you see remoteness from them. Thank you very much. By the way, is Simple Past also called "remote verb forms".
Shun Tang
If the whole thing can be explained as formality, why on earth shall we depend more on remoteness? It is illogical. Do we really need to throw two stones to kill one bird?You wrote:Yes I do, and so do a lot of other people. For example, when a hotel receptionist asks a customer "What was your name again?", he or she is using Past Simple to express a remoteness (in this case formality) at the time of speaking (i.e. the present time).Shun wrote:May I ask, do you use Simple Past also to say a present remoteness? I really don't think so. Do you?
Even so, the case can be explained even without formality. It happens many times a day. I asked someone, "What IS your name, please?" Next moment I forgot the name, so I had to ask again, "What WAS your name again?" In this case, I was pointing out you DID tell me the name, but I forgot and wanted to ask again what WAS the name you had told me.
As you see, when the real world does not permit us to say in Simple Present "What IS your name, please?", we then have to build up something to explain it, maybe the remoteness theory.
--------------------
Usually, in the phone after we have started talking for a moment and sending greetings, I would go back to the main topic: "I was calling....." Compared with what we are talking now, "I was calling" is a past, which throws a contrast with the previous greetings or topic. The whole thing can be well explained by time comparison only. Most often, we don't say "I was calling....." at all.You wrote:Past Continuous can be used in the same way e.g. I might telephone someone and say "I was calling to find out what time you were arriving" (even though I'm calling now and the other person is arriving tomorrow
As for the coming arrival, I would like to say ".....what time you ARE arriving". Again, when the real world won't permit me to say this, I will turn to another plan, maybe the remoteness theory.
--------------------
YOUR EXAMPLES WILL DEEPLY HURT ONLY REMOTENESS THEORY
I really don't know how you define remoteness. It seems to me, after I have used Simple Past, it is then explained as remote. It is not because I have found it remote that I use Simple Past. I don't find your cases remote at all.
-- In the case of asking for name, I ask for your name when I need it right now, how can it be remote? Physically or psychologically, it is not remote at all. Therefore, it is not because of remoteness that we use past tense. You can trick a student, a very young one, but not us here.
-- In the telephone case here, our conversion is near. Very near. It is not remote at all. Therefore, WAS CALLING is not related to any remoteness. However, without remoteness, it can be explained correctly by conventional theory of time.
-- Talking about time, again, as time is running fast, the moment you ACHIEVE something, SAYING the achievement, though instantly, can be comparatively a past: "Great! We did it!!!". This can only be explained by comparison of time. It is much more reasonable than explaining the achievement as remote. In all aspects, it is not remote.
As you have regarded the cases above as remoteness, please explain HOW you see remoteness from them. Thank you very much. By the way, is Simple Past also called "remote verb forms".
Shun Tang
I am sorry but you seemed to have forgot my point here:LarryLatham wrote:Although time in the future is also remote, the use of remote verb forms expresses remote facts (in the user's eyes, of course). Therefore, future remoteness is excluded because, as we all know, future events cannot be seen as factual. (The only exception to that is in situations where the event in question is a scheduled event--such as an airline flight or a bus departure time--which occurs routinely, so that the user has good reason to expect that the event is a pre-determined fact. This allows for sentences like: "The flight leaves tomorrow at 9 o'clock." Remoteness is not involved here, but future factuality is.)
Larry Latham
Larry you prefer to use terms such as fact, remote, and schedule here. That is why I have been joking, English is a language that doesn't have tenses to express time. But you shall not take it as a joke. It is but a fact. Am I correct?
Shun Tang
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
I am afraid you are not thinking very clearly here, again, Shuntang. You are jumping to the conclusion that because lolwhites' example sentence included the word "again" at the end, that the apparent fact of a prior request for a name is the a priori reason for using a remote form (a supposed reference to the earlier request). However, the example sentence could just as well be:Even so, the case can be explained even without formality. It happens many times a day. I asked someone, "What IS your name, please?" Next moment I forgot the name, so I had to ask again, "What WAS your name again?" In this case, I was pointing out you DID tell me the name, but I forgot and wanted to ask again what WAS the name you had told me.
What was your name? ...without the "again". Or even, "What did you say your name was?"
No explicit reference exists, here, to some possible earlier request. But the remote verb form still applies, and is not only correct in every respect, but common in native speech as well. The issue for grammarians, then, becomes explaining why a remote form is used when no past time event is referenced. Michael Lewis' answer, which lolwhites and I both (along with thousands of other hopefully thoughtful practitioners of the English language) accept as a reasonable explanation, is that the remoteness is not about time, but about the relationship perceived by the verb user between himself and the person he is addressing. It is not unfriendly, but he explicitly acknowledges that it is remote. You do accept that people have different kinds of human relationships, do you not? Some of them are close, and some are, by contrast, remote.
None of this precludes the possibility of asking someone"
"What is your name, please?"
That too is correct in all respects. However, the sentence with remote form exists in natural speech, and so therefore must be explained.
Larry Latham
I didn't jump to conclusion. You have jumped it for me. No matter your examples or Lolwhites', my own answer still stands firm. You didn't read my point in bold letters: If the real world doesn't allow me to say in Simple Present, "What is your name, please?", then I will resort to remoteness theory. Tell me quick if Simple Present is not permissible here.LarryLatham wrote:I am afraid you are not thinking very clearly here, again, Shuntang. You are jumping to the conclusion that because lolwhites' example sentence included the word "again" at the end, that the apparent fact of a prior request for a name is the a priori reason for using a remote form (a supposed reference to the earlier request). However, the example sentence could just as well be:
What was your name? ...without the "again". Or even, "What did you say your name was?"
Larry Latham
However, on the other hand, please understand that if Simple Present is allowed, and because as you say it is a remote case, then remoteness can be expressed by Simple Present.
Formality, as Lolwhites suggested, can explain why we use Simple Past, though. But it has been long existed before Lewis' ideas.
Shun Tang
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Remoteness exists only in the mind of the user, Shuntang. It does not inhere in the "case" or the factoids of the situation under discussion here about the grammar. What you say above is impossible by default, because when it is remote, it is remote only because the user expresses it as such. One of the most important lessons about English grammar (probably also about grammar in any language as well, including Chinese) is that situations do not control how the grammar is put together, users do.However, on the other hand, please understand that if Simple Present is allowed, and because as you say it is a remote case, then remoteness can be expressed by Simple Present.
Larry Latham
If I did not get your earlier point, as you say in your last post, it was because I did not understand it. I'll have to be frank with you, Shuntang, and admit that I often do not understand what you say. Not only do I sometimes have difficulty with your English (which is a minor problem), I often cannot follow your logic (which is an occluding problem).
Larry wrote:Michael Lewis' answer, which lolwhites and I both (along with thousands of other hopefully thoughtful practitioners of the English language) accept as a reasonable explanation, is that the remoteness is not about time, but about the relationship perceived by the verb user between himself and the person he is addressing.
I guess that is the point. Why do we have to talk about remoteness and immediacy that exist only in the mind of the user? Sarn Rich the author admitted he didn't know exactly what is remote, and you have admitted you find immediacy difficult to define. Why then these vague remoteness and elusive immediacy are so important that we have to talk about them in every sentence? I don't care about your remoteness and immediacy -- especially when you don't even know them by yourself. Personally, on the other hand, I really don't want to express my remoteness or immediacy -- at least not in every sentence. I don't care about them. I just want to express time, which is important in all kinds of languages, and therefore I need to use tenses. But why does remoteness theory preempt the tenses we use to express time?Larry wrote:Remoteness exists only in the mind of the user, Shuntang.
Shun
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Because language exists for the purpose of facilitating communication between people. What is important about that is that people are motivated by what is in their minds, and that is always ethereal, temporary, and constantantly shifting. Language is tailored to fit that always changing landscape.
You want to nail it down to a set of absolute rules, which can be snipped from the language and examined at your leisure with mathmatical constancy. While mathmatics is sometimes described as a language, there is a striking difference between math and English. Two plus two always equals four, no matter how you frame it, no matter when you do the math. But English (or any other language) is much more flexible, and can be manipulated by the user to express what he has in his mind at the moment of use.
That is precisely why we find it illuminating to talk about remoteness or immediacy that exists in the mind of the user. He hopes, of course, that his listeners will understand his meaning...his message.
Larry Latham
You want to nail it down to a set of absolute rules, which can be snipped from the language and examined at your leisure with mathmatical constancy. While mathmatics is sometimes described as a language, there is a striking difference between math and English. Two plus two always equals four, no matter how you frame it, no matter when you do the math. But English (or any other language) is much more flexible, and can be manipulated by the user to express what he has in his mind at the moment of use.
That is precisely why we find it illuminating to talk about remoteness or immediacy that exists in the mind of the user. He hopes, of course, that his listeners will understand his meaning...his message.
Larry Latham
Do you really believe all these are expressed merely by the symbols such as -ed, -s, have -ed, etc.?LarryLatham wrote:Because language exists for the purpose of facilitating communication between people. What is important about that is that people are motivated by what is in their minds, and that is always ethereal, temporary, and constantantly shifting. Language is tailored to fit that always changing landscape.
Are you sure they are not expressed by sentences?
Shun Tang
Lolwhites,
You also know remoteness theory very well, and you know what we are talking about, at least approximately. In your opinion, why remoteness and immediacy are so important?
Sarn Rich the author admitted he didn't know exactly what is remote, and Larry has admitted that he finds immediacy difficult to define. Then why are these vague remoteness and elusive immediacy so important that we have to signal about them in every sentence?
Shun Tang
You also know remoteness theory very well, and you know what we are talking about, at least approximately. In your opinion, why remoteness and immediacy are so important?
Sarn Rich the author admitted he didn't know exactly what is remote, and Larry has admitted that he finds immediacy difficult to define. Then why are these vague remoteness and elusive immediacy so important that we have to signal about them in every sentence?
Shun Tang
Larry,
I also don't believe that the landscape around me is swiftly changing while I am typing an email. What kind of a joke it is: the landscape changes differently while I type different tenses. But I'll agree that you may tell your young students. Still, you definitely need protection against students. Keep "The English Verb" at hand, and show the evidence to the students.
I also doubt that while I discuss English tense with you, I have to secretly report the changing of the landscape or some kind of distance I don't clearly know of. Honestly, I swear I have never done that. I admit I can never do that. And I have never got an iota of your expressions of your landscape or distance solely in your mind.
Also, it is hard to believe that in newspapers, while a reporter uses all Simple Past to report a conflict at war, he is implying the landscape or distance would not change a bit.
Shun Tang
I guess most people will, including me, agree with you that language is playing the role you said. But I was asking about the tenses forms. I don't think a few tenses forms, a few suffixes, can play the role of a language.You wrote:Because language exists for the purpose of facilitating communication between people. What is important about that is that people are motivated by what is in their minds, and that is always ethereal, temporary, and constantantly shifting. Language is tailored to fit that always changing landscape.
I also don't believe that the landscape around me is swiftly changing while I am typing an email. What kind of a joke it is: the landscape changes differently while I type different tenses. But I'll agree that you may tell your young students. Still, you definitely need protection against students. Keep "The English Verb" at hand, and show the evidence to the students.
I also doubt that while I discuss English tense with you, I have to secretly report the changing of the landscape or some kind of distance I don't clearly know of. Honestly, I swear I have never done that. I admit I can never do that. And I have never got an iota of your expressions of your landscape or distance solely in your mind.
Also, it is hard to believe that in newspapers, while a reporter uses all Simple Past to report a conflict at war, he is implying the landscape or distance would not change a bit.
Shun Tang
Last edited by shuntang on Wed May 26, 2004 9:29 am, edited 1 time in total.