change in what sense

Seiichi MYOGA · Post by **Seiichi MYOGA** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:33 am

The emphasis is on the process when we choose Progressive. And if someone is in the process of nearing a situation, we can use a stative verb for Progressive as well.

(1) Are you remembering something?
(2) I'm forgetting my English.
(3) Ken is resembling his father more and more.

How do you describe the change these sentences above are expected to convey? Gradual or Sudden?

Thank you for your help.
Seiichi MYOGA

I think you won't accept (4).

(4) Have you been remembering something?
(5) I've been forgetting my English.
(6) Ken has been resembling his father more and more.

woodcutter · Post by **woodcutter** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:23 am

Erm, of course these things are not sudden.

Though I am resembling my father at a faster pace than I would like.

I can't think of any natural context for (4).

Harzer · Post by **Harzer** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:39 am

I think one can construct a situation where (4) is OK:

Someone suddenly breaks off in mid-sentence during a lively discussion and looks rather uncomfortable >>

"are you remembering something (that you didn't want to remember because it brings back bad memories - eg a holocaust survivor)?"

Harzer

Lorikeet · Post by **Lorikeet** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:11 pm

Harzer wrote:I think one can construct a situation where (4) is OK:

Someone suddenly breaks off in mid-sentence during a lively discussion and looks rather uncomfortable >>

"are you remembering something (that you didn't want to remember because it brings back bad memories - eg a holocaust survivor)?"

Harzer

That's 1. It would have to be the psychiatrist inquiring of his patient to be 4

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:27 pm

Present Progressive is not strictly about sudden change. Sudden changes only apply to the meanings of those examples. If your examples get rid of "since....", the progressive forms remain the same meanings, that is, the situations they are now.

Progressive forms answer the question why we have so many tenses but only two kinds of time: past and present. Haven't we noticed that any Simple Present can be said again in either Present Progressive or Perfect Progressive (not Past Progressive!!), without making a big mistake or losing a great deal of meaning?

"I live in Hong Kong."
"I am living in Hong Kong."
"I have been living in Hong Kong."

"We discuss the progressive tense"
"We are discussing the progressive tense"
"We have been discussing the progressive tense"

"He teaches English in that school."
"He is teaching English in that school."
"He has been teaching English in that school."

"The earth revolves around the sun."
"The earth is revolving around the sun."
"The earth has been revolving around the sun."

Therefore I always claim we shall discuss both Present Progressive and Perfect Progressive at the same time. They are inseparable. I have repeated this point for so many times that I can't hardly post a question about them now.

Having got your answer (as I hope), you are now exploring further about the form. I suggest we shall ponder an interesting point above, that is, why Simple Present can be said again in either Present Progressive or Perfect Progressive?

(I didn't say these progressive forms can reversly be said again in Simple Present, though.)

Or do you think there are big differences between the three forms?

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:48 pm

These are probable, though not the only, meanings of your similar (?) examples:

"I live in HK" I see it as a permanent situation.

"I'm living in HK" It's temporary.

"I've been living in HK" I'm back in NY and I've finished my one year in HK".

Not the same things at all.

"We discuss etc" This is something we often do.

"We're discussing etc " This is something we're doing at the moment.

"We've been discussing etc" We've stopped.

Not the same things at all.

"He teaches" He has an indefinite contract.

"He's teaching" His contract is annual and he changes schools a lot.

"He's been etc" He's just finished an annual contract. Who knows what he'll do next?

Not the same things.

The second "earth" example doesn't convince me at all.

If you think these are interchangeable "without losing a great deal of meaning" then I throw my hands up in despair.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:34 pm

JuanTwoThree wrote:These are probable, though not the only, meanings of your similar (?) examples:

ExA: "I live in HK" I see it as a permanent situation.

ExB: "I'm living in HK" It's temporary.

ExC: "I've been living in HK" I'm back in NY and I've finished my one year in HK".
===============

Sorry I cannot discuss every group of comparison.

As for ExA:
This is my habit: "I like to travel and live in different places for some years. I have lived in USA, Canada, and many other places. Last three years I lived in Japan. Now I live in HK."
Does Simple Present indicate a permanent situation? It is only temporary.

As for ExB:
In the description above, I may also use "...........Now I am living in HK." As you say, it's temporary. Or whatever.

As for ExC:
"I've been living in HK" doesn't necessarily indicate an end. You may consult anyone here if you don't believe. In the description above, I may also say ".........I have been living in HK for quite a while now." As you say, it's temporary. Or whatever.

Xui

Duncan Powrie · Post by **Duncan Powrie** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:40 pm

Nice contextualizations, JTT. I would agree that "I've been living in HK", without additional phrases such as "for three years" or "since 2001", strongly suggests that the speaker is now not in HK but back in e.g. NY and offering an explanation as to where he's been all this time; it is not the same thing as "I am living in HK (now), (and) I've been (living here/there) for three years/since..." at all.

The semantics of "living in HK" are thus quite different from e.g. "studying Japanese": with "living in HK", the "now" sense is expressed with Present Progressive alone and/or Present Perfect Progressive+phrases denoting the length of time, and the "then" sense with Present Perfect Progressive alone (or, more likely, explicitly past forms); with "studying Japanese", the "divide" between Present and Perfect Progressive is more blurred (probably because you can study more or less anywhere!), so the former could be viewed as a proform of the latter (and the latter without additional for/since phrases) in this specific instance, right?

Hmm, where does Present Perfect fit into all of this? My head's hurting...

I say all the above because I've given some cursory thought to some examples on Seiichi's other thread, but I wasn't entirely happy with my analysis there:

I wrote:With regard to Ken's English, sure, it appears that "is forgetting" is a sort of proform of "has been forgetting" (but not everyone would agree that the former is entirely natural).

Similarly, "I'm studying Japanese" is not really that different from "I've been studying Japanese".

However, once we move beyond an implicit "now", the proform probably has to give way to the longer with phrases that mention the length of time the activity has been continuing for/since.

Ken is forgetting his English.

?Ken is forgetting his English since he came back to Japan.

Ken has been forgetting his English (since he came back to Japan)

Ken has forgotten his English (since he came back to Japan)

(Incidentally, the last two sentences above could have the meaning of "isn't studying it as a subject now", that is, "has forgotten all about studying English").

Ken has forgotten a lot of (his) English (since...)

I'm now wondering how often the Perfect Progressive appears just by itself, without any following time phrases (and with which verbs it might do so)? I feel there is a strong subconscious urge to add the time phrases to the form, otherwise, we would probably only have the Present Progressive form!

Please tell me if you spot any boo-boos in my further (more refined? thanks to you, JTT!) thinking here.

The broad, sweeping, unrefined form-meaning correspondances that Shun expects to see operating are mindlessly, ridiculously mechanistic; the generalizations that others are making do try to account for a wider range of possible meanings. Ultimately, we might need to look at things on a case by case, verb by verb, context by context basis.

P.S. Shun posted just before me; I don't have time to read (I don't have time for?!

) what he wrote.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:48 pm

Duncan Powrie wrote:I would agree that "I've been living in HK", without additional phrases such as "for three years" or "since 2001", strongly suggests that the speaker is now not in HK but back in e.g. NY

Why can the phrases make a difference?

We are getting near to the answer for all the questions now!!

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:52 pm

Now be fair, I said probable and not the only.

"The difference between you and me is that you live and I 'm living in HK"

They can't possibly be the same or else the above wouldn't make any sense.

I'm well aware that "I've been living" doesn't necessarily mean an end but it CAN so there is a potentially a great deal of difference in meaning.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:56 pm

JuanTwoThree wrote:Now be fair, I said probable and not the only.

"The difference between you and me is that you live and I 'm living in HK"

They can't possibly be the same or else the above wouldn't make any sense.

I'm well aware that "I've been living" doesn't necessarily mean an end but it CAN so there is a potentially a great deal of difference in meaning.

Yes, I agree with you, probably.

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:58 pm

Hoorah

Duncan Powrie · Post by **Duncan Powrie** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:03 pm

Xui wrote:
Duncan Powrie wrote:I would agree that "I've been living in HK", without additional phrases such as "for three years" or "since 2001", strongly suggests that the speaker is now not in HK but back in e.g. NY
Why can the phrases make a difference?
We are getting near to the answer for all the questions now!!

I work for food now. Give me fifty bucks, Shun, and I might just make that final push on into the realm of insanity and come up with a "final solution".

I am not sure if I can explain (to your satisfaction) WHY the time phrases make a difference - I can really only "show" meaning through contextualized examples - so all I can say is that they obviously DO make a difference (as does their absence, please note!).

Also, remember that I am talking about Present Progressive vs. Present Perfect Progressive here, not about Present Perfect: I'm studying Japanese=I've been studying Japanese? vs. I've been studying Japanese for 3 years; "Tom, you('ve (been)) lived (living) in HK (for 3 years), haven't/didn't you" "Yes, I did ( - for 3 years)" OR "Yes I have (- for 3 years)" - past as past or past connected and leading into the present, but no present in and of itself (unless there is no "duration" said of the "experiential fact"). Hmm not making much sense here, am I.

With Present Perfect, a time phrase is optional; with Present Perfect Progressive, a time phrase may not be supplied, in which case the meaning might be "past" (I've been living in HK") or "now" ("I've been studying Japanese"), depending on the semantics of the verb; or a time phrase may be supplied, in which case, the meaning is obviously "up to now".

Which is kind of what we have generally known all along about Perfect aspect, right? In every case, the time phrase is "simply" additional information that helps reinforce the intended meaning (but which it is not always necessary to explicitly state).

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:38 pm

Duncan Powrie wrote:
Xui wrote:
Duncan Powrie wrote:I would agree that "I've been living in HK", without additional phrases such as "for three years" or "since 2001", strongly suggests that the speaker is now not in HK but back in e.g. NY
Why can the phrases make a difference?
We are getting near to the answer for all the questions now!!
I work for food now. Give me fifty bucks, Shun, and I might just make that final push on into the realm of insanity and come up with a "final solution".

I am not sure if I can explain (to your satisfaction) WHY the time phrases make a difference - I can really only "show" meaning through contextualized examples - so all I can say is that they obviously DO make a difference (as does their absence, please note!!).

You cheater. You know it but pretend you don't. I can't accept such a liar. I am out of here.

You get what you want, happy now!

Duncan Powrie · Post by **Duncan Powrie** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:50 pm

Suit yourself, Shun.

I don't know what I know - please don't imagine I am a sadistic genius who knows what you "know", but who is pretending he doesn't. I am exploring here (if you don't mind).

If you know the answers, please tell us - but CLEARLY, and be genuinely willing to explore too yourself. You're stomping off just as it is perhaps getting interesting (I'd also like to point out that I've added a fair bit to my previous post in the edits).