Oh yes it is! The speaker uses a remote form to "distance" himself/herself from the listener in order to sound more polite.But please note that Lolwhites' example "What was you name, please?" (even without again) is not remote at all.
now
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
Andrew Patterson
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Lowhites is right, "What was your name," is an example of distancing.
Something I've noticed here, though - I used to think that there were two forms of distancing,
1. Remote modal verbs, and
2. The past subjunctive.
This is clearly not an example of the past subjunctive, as it is still talking about things are they really are. Is this still the indicative mood, though? I'm not sure.
This use of remoteness seems closer to the use of distant modals than it does to the past subjunctive.
The other test to show it isn't the past subjunctive is that (with the possible exception of some North England dialects) one cannot substitute "was" for "were" here. (The Northern dialects don't need the subjunctive to substitute "were" in any case.)
Something I've noticed here, though - I used to think that there were two forms of distancing,
1. Remote modal verbs, and
2. The past subjunctive.
This is clearly not an example of the past subjunctive, as it is still talking about things are they really are. Is this still the indicative mood, though? I'm not sure.
This use of remoteness seems closer to the use of distant modals than it does to the past subjunctive.
The other test to show it isn't the past subjunctive is that (with the possible exception of some North England dialects) one cannot substitute "was" for "were" here. (The Northern dialects don't need the subjunctive to substitute "were" in any case.)
The point is, other than this one, how many are there? Please!!lolwhites wrote:Oh yes it is! The speaker uses a remote form to "distance" himself/herself from the listener in order to sound more polite.But please note that Lolwhites' example "What was you name, please?" (even without again) is not remote at all.
How can you explain "What is your name, please?"? It is not polite anymore?
Shun Tang
Larry,
As you see, in the past, our present forums in this website didn't need to register, and people who lacked of reason and failed to follow the thread would send threat mail in anonymous post. Nobody should have taken it seriously. But I took it as a sign of announcing failure. Therefore I will keep myself from saying anything personal near that. I will not admit failure in such a way, expressing my anger. Therefore, I would always delete my angry expression, my standard of failure, and apologize, which I should. I hope I can always focus on the subject matters, and not the person.
I must thank you for the whole thing about remoteness theory. But if you don't believe that I have discussed for decades about tenses, you are wrong. If you think during these decades I have seldom met grotesque jargons or ways of discussion, you guess wrong. Experience told me that, to nail a jargon, just ask clearly what it is. When it is clear, it loses the power. Metal56 has given a good definition for remoteness. Then he has announced its funeral, unless you can give a better definition than his.
Remoteness is cheap because it is not so important than "two minutes ago". A case happened "two minutes ago" entails Simple Past, no matter how I can brag it is so near and so immediate to the present, physically or psychologically:
Ex: I saw a man standing there two minutes ago.
----------------
But I repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat: you have to say a meaning by a sentence. A tense only tells a kind of time. In "The girl's eyes are big", the sentence describes the characteristic of her eyes. Simple Present says the characteristic is not finished by now.
Not finished by now is the definition of present, and past is finished by now. The notion of present, past, finished, not finished, are the basic and the main terms I use to explain all the tenses. They are understandable by young students. As for the notion of Remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND), on the other hand, is not for understanding. But you and Metal56 claim you can understand it and in every sentence give the judgment whether it is there or not. You can do it because your judgment can be so quick. I am impressed.
In reporting a case story, as everything is past, we use all Simple Past to say it. In your analysis, all things in the story are bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND). Metal56 is more flexible, as he could drop the nonsense sometimes. Larry you can't. For you, there is no turning point.
----------------
Maybe you don't know, some kids can use tense long before they know remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND). I really don't want to tell you whether I understand all this or not. It is so embarrassing.
----------------
----------------
To be fair for your examples, even without Yesterday or Last Month, we still understand the happenings in Simple Past are "finished by now", a past. They are cases in the past.
The purpose you relate the examples this way is to avoid the embarrassing point that some of these time adverbs control and command Simple Past. A young student would believe that you are still telling the important factor remoteness, and at the same time you want to express time. Not for us here, please. Even though you don't want to express the important factor remoteness, because of Yesterday or Last Month, you have to use Simple Past. Comparing with time, remoteness is nothing. Every language has to express time, and only English has to express remoteness, and ignore the time, as you claim in all your examples above.
Time adverbs are much more specific than merely using tense, and therefore using time adverb and a tense at the same time is not redundant at all. Moreover, tenses work to carry the time frame to the whole of the paragraph.
As for the notion of FACT, it can be expressed by any tense. In court, after one has sworn in, he has to tell the true fact, nothing but the true fact. And he still can use any tense. Please think about it.
----------------
It is interesting that as you claim you don't understand me sometimes, you think I must misunderstand you often. It is very kind of you. I thank you for that.
Shun Tang
As you see, in the past, our present forums in this website didn't need to register, and people who lacked of reason and failed to follow the thread would send threat mail in anonymous post. Nobody should have taken it seriously. But I took it as a sign of announcing failure. Therefore I will keep myself from saying anything personal near that. I will not admit failure in such a way, expressing my anger. Therefore, I would always delete my angry expression, my standard of failure, and apologize, which I should. I hope I can always focus on the subject matters, and not the person.
I must thank you for the whole thing about remoteness theory. But if you don't believe that I have discussed for decades about tenses, you are wrong. If you think during these decades I have seldom met grotesque jargons or ways of discussion, you guess wrong. Experience told me that, to nail a jargon, just ask clearly what it is. When it is clear, it loses the power. Metal56 has given a good definition for remoteness. Then he has announced its funeral, unless you can give a better definition than his.
Remoteness is cheap because it is not so important than "two minutes ago". A case happened "two minutes ago" entails Simple Past, no matter how I can brag it is so near and so immediate to the present, physically or psychologically:
Ex: I saw a man standing there two minutes ago.
----------------
I agree it is a well-formed sentence, teacher. I've analyzed this kind of examples for countless times, even to you. People are wrong as they claim they can see the whole world from just a tense: Remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND).You wrote:Look at this sentence:
That girl's eyes are big!
Would you agree that it is a well-formed sentence? Would you also agree that it seems silly to assert that it means: RIGHT NOW that girl’s eyes are big! ?
But I repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat and repeat: you have to say a meaning by a sentence. A tense only tells a kind of time. In "The girl's eyes are big", the sentence describes the characteristic of her eyes. Simple Present says the characteristic is not finished by now.
Not finished by now is the definition of present, and past is finished by now. The notion of present, past, finished, not finished, are the basic and the main terms I use to explain all the tenses. They are understandable by young students. As for the notion of Remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND), on the other hand, is not for understanding. But you and Metal56 claim you can understand it and in every sentence give the judgment whether it is there or not. You can do it because your judgment can be so quick. I am impressed.
In reporting a case story, as everything is past, we use all Simple Past to say it. In your analysis, all things in the story are bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND). Metal56 is more flexible, as he could drop the nonsense sometimes. Larry you can't. For you, there is no turning point.
----------------
Because you have to judge if there is remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND), I wonder if you have any time left to see whether there is Time or not. Time is everywhere, of course there is time here. The sentence expresses the relation between you and him. Simple Present indicates the relation is not yet finished. I am so sorry that I have to explain the same simple way for every Simple Present sentence. But tenses are originally simple and easy.You wrote:How about another one:
I am his father.
Is there anything about time in this sentence? I don’t think so.
Maybe you don't know, some kids can use tense long before they know remoteness, bringing together the notions of modality (COND, PROP, and possibly HAB), distance from present (past), distance between the speakers (politeness), distance through mediation by someone else's consciousness (IND). I really don't want to tell you whether I understand all this or not. It is so embarrassing.
----------------
The sentence says it is her job. Simple Present says it is not finished. It is now still her job.You wrote: She sells apples.
However, you might say this to your friend sitting next to you about the girl across the aisle from you on the bus. She clearly is not selling apples at the moment…she is riding home on the bus.
----------------
Why? Even remoteness and immediacy are not enough to decide the tenses forms, so we have to make use some more terms, like fact? Or you want to say that FACT is part of your remoteness, so you still calculate the important factor -- remoteness?You wrote:If you want to make a simple statement of fact, and you, at the same time, do want to say something about time as well, you do it with time-words:
Yesterday it rained pretty hard.
He sold three houses last month.
Today is my birthday.
I’ll finish that book tomorrow.
To be fair for your examples, even without Yesterday or Last Month, we still understand the happenings in Simple Past are "finished by now", a past. They are cases in the past.
The purpose you relate the examples this way is to avoid the embarrassing point that some of these time adverbs control and command Simple Past. A young student would believe that you are still telling the important factor remoteness, and at the same time you want to express time. Not for us here, please. Even though you don't want to express the important factor remoteness, because of Yesterday or Last Month, you have to use Simple Past. Comparing with time, remoteness is nothing. Every language has to express time, and only English has to express remoteness, and ignore the time, as you claim in all your examples above.
Time adverbs are much more specific than merely using tense, and therefore using time adverb and a tense at the same time is not redundant at all. Moreover, tenses work to carry the time frame to the whole of the paragraph.
As for the notion of FACT, it can be expressed by any tense. In court, after one has sworn in, he has to tell the true fact, nothing but the true fact. And he still can use any tense. Please think about it.
----------------
And you continue to play the role of the author who has mastered The English Verb.You wrote:Somehow, you continue to miss the point.
It is interesting that as you claim you don't understand me sometimes, you think I must misunderstand you often. It is very kind of you. I thank you for that.
Shun Tang
If we have to say "What WAS you name?" only, and that it has to be explained by remoteness, I will accept remoteness.
But now we may STILL be able to use Simple Present to ask for the name: "What IS your name, please?" And the examples like "What WAS your name, please?" are only just a few, shall we drop the whole system of tense of telling time, and replace with another system of not telling the time at all?
Is this a wise chioce?
But now we may STILL be able to use Simple Present to ask for the name: "What IS your name, please?" And the examples like "What WAS your name, please?" are only just a few, shall we drop the whole system of tense of telling time, and replace with another system of not telling the time at all?
Is this a wise chioce?
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
How many cases we have to use Simple Past, at the present time, for something not finished, like "What WAS your name?"? Why shall we have to avoid to talk about its counterpart "What IS your name?"? Is the latter a contempt? If so, please tell me instantly, because I usually use "What is your name, please?"Andrew Patterson wrote:Lowhites is right, "What was your name," is an example of distancing.
Something I've noticed here, though - I used to think that there were two forms of distancing,
1. Remote modal verbs, and
2. The past subjunctive.
This is clearly not an example of the past subjunctive, as it is still talking about things are they really are. Is this still the indicative mood, though? I'm not sure.
This use of remoteness seems closer to the use of distant modals than it does to the past subjunctive.
The other test to show it isn't the past subjunctive is that (with the possible exception of some North England dialects) one cannot substitute "was" for "were" here. (The Northern dialects don't need the subjunctive to substitute "were" in any case.)
On the other hand, if we people want to claim to be careful about small problems in English tense, why every grammar book has to avoid the unavoidable family -- the Past Family (see the thread of "The Past Family")? How often we have to use "in the past xx years", with Present Perfect? And we honest people still hide away these past time adverbials and claim Present Perfect doesn't stay with past time adverbials. Is this fair?
Shun
Lolwhites, to be frank, I am not an EFL, so I really don't know I can say "Hello, what was you name, please?" at the very first meeting. I found it very strange. (Of course, I have accepted it now and will use it certainly. I am not challenging anything.) I really want to know that, other than this example, how many are there? I only know that past-form auxiliaries can do so, but I don't know about any other verbs or cases. Would you help?Lolwhites wrote:Oh yes it is! The speaker uses a remote form to "distance" himself/herself from the listener in order to sound more polite.Shun wrote:But please note that Lolwhites' example "What was you name, please?" (even without again) is not remote at all.
I also want to know why Simple Present "What is your name, please?" is impolite. Thank you very much.
Shun Tang
It isn't impolite, and I never said it was. It would be quite properly used in many contexts. I just said that "What was your name please?" is more polite as it creates a distancing effect between speaker and listener, and implies a more formal relationship.I also want to know why Simple Present "What is your name, please?" is impolite.
You'd have to consult a corpus to find out. It's something I don't have time to do during term timeI really want to know that, other than this example, how many are there?
. However, other examples are certainly possible:Client: I'd like to book a flight to Hong Kong.
Agent: When did you want to travel?
Salesman to potential customer: I wondered if you wanted to buy any double glazing.
Employee to manager: I was hoping you could give me a pay rise this year.
All these examples may refer to present and not past time.
In this case, may I suggest that Simple Present is also correct for all the examples here about the present time? If so, remoteness is but an additional thing, not a replacement for the system of expressing time.lolwhites wrote:It isn't impolite, and I never said it was. It would be quite properly used in many contexts. I just said that "What was your name please?" is more polite as it creates a distancing effect between speaker and listener, and implies a more formal relationship.I also want to know why Simple Present "What is your name, please?" is impolite.
You'd have to consult a corpus to find out. It's something I don't have time to do during term timeI really want to know that, other than this example, how many are there?
Client: I'd like to book a flight to Hong Kong.
Agent: When did you want to travel?
Salesman to potential customer: I wondered if you wanted to buy any double glazing.
Employee to manager: I was hoping you could give me a pay rise this year.
All these examples may refer to present and not past time.
Thank you very much.
Shun
Absolutely, Shun, the Simple Present could be used if the speaker wishes to sound less formal. The point is that the speaker can choose which form to use depending on his or her judgement of the situation, the listener and how formal he or she wishes to sound.
The decision as to whether or not to use a Remote form lies with the speaker. The fact that either form is possible in the contexts given in no way invalidates Remoteness Theory, quite the contrary in fact. Since the difference between "When do you want to travel?" and "When did you want to travel?" is, in the context given, not related to time (as both utterances refer to the moment of speaking), the Immediate/Remote distinction becomes absolutely fundamental.
The decision as to whether or not to use a Remote form lies with the speaker. The fact that either form is possible in the contexts given in no way invalidates Remoteness Theory, quite the contrary in fact. Since the difference between "When do you want to travel?" and "When did you want to travel?" is, in the context given, not related to time (as both utterances refer to the moment of speaking), the Immediate/Remote distinction becomes absolutely fundamental.
OK, Lolwhites, I am afraid you were going too far.lolwhites wrote:Absolutely, Shun, the Simple Present could be used if the speaker wishes to sound less formal. The point is that the speaker can choose which form to use depending on his or her judgement of the situation, the listener and how formal he or she wishes to sound.
The decision as to whether or not to use a Remote form lies with the speaker. The fact that either form is possible in the contexts given in no way invalidates Remoteness Theory, quite the contrary in fact. Since the difference between "When do you want to travel?" and "When did you want to travel?" is, in the context given, not related to time (as both utterances refer to the moment of speaking), the Immediate/Remote distinction becomes absolutely fundamental.
Now as you say so, let's begin another round of discussion of remote theory. I don't believe you still embrace and sing for your vagueness in which there is not an iota of truth. This is another version of "Golden Rule" that Present Perfect doesn't stay with past time expressions. I have seen enough falsity in English tense. And I will prove to you the remoteness to be rubbish.
First, using the conventional way of time expression, I will explain all here and more examples you could possibly invent. You may check your corpus to find out more examples you regard as most convincing. You can't depend the remoteness theory on just a few examples here, can you?
Secondly, can you please decipher all the terms Metal56 has said? What do these acronyms stand for: COND, PROP, HAB, and IND? If you need help, please ask Metal56. Should you find his definitions are not standard, please provide whatever you know about remoteness or immediacy.
I will sincerely believe any results you give me. And we'll talk. I wait for your message.
Shun
Try out remoteness in mock politeness:lolwhites wrote:Oh yes it is! The speaker uses a remote form to "distance" himself/herself from the listener in order to sound more polite.But please note that Lolwhites' example "What was you name, please?" (even without again) is not remote at all.
Did sir plan to buy that jacket, (or just wear it in the shop)?
Go on, then. Can you explain the examples I gave in terms if time? As far as I, and the other native speakers on this forum, can see, they all refer to the moment of speaking and have nothing to do with the past. Nothing you've said demonstrates otherwise.I will prove to you the remoteness to be rubbish.
First, using the conventional way of time expression, I will explain all here and more examples you could possibly invent
You miss the point. These examples may not be the most common use of the "Past", nevertheless they exist and have to be explained. It can't be done in terms of time so we need to find another explanation. They, and all other uses of the Past, can all be accounted for by Remoteness; they can't all be accounted for by past time.You can't depend the remoteness theory on just a few examples here, can you?
Any example of "Past Simple" can be acounted for by remoteness; not every example can be accounted for by reference to Past Time. Even you haven't tried to do that. I'm dying to know how "When did you want to travel?" (from an earlier post) refers to past time.