Tense!?!

[Lithobid]

So there I am teaching the Past Perfect v.s. Past Simple, and everyone's soaking it up slowly.

They're getting the idea of how PP is used to talk about background information when telling a story, or sharing a conincidence (sp?) .

Then a simple sentence popped into my head and I couldn't for the life of me think of how to put it into the past tense.

"He didn't come today" - Present Simple

"He hadn't come today" - Past Perfect - Right?

"He has come today" - Past Simple? Right?

Any help is appreciated. I always like to make sure I'm barking the correct information to my SS.

Lithobid

[Slip]

Eh?

He didn't come today- past simple

He hadn't come today- would be past perfect but how can you say it?- surely it would be correct to say 'He hasn't come today' as today hasn't finished yet- present perfect which is your final example.

Alternatively if you said 'he hadn't come yesterday/this morning' (a time that has already passed) then that is the past perfect.

[EDIT to say: For those tricky grammar problems that we native speakers just don't seem to able to get right I can recommend 'English Grammar in Use' by Raymond Murphy. Cambrdge Uni Press].

Edited March 31, 2009 by Slip

[Lithobid]

Eh?

He didn't come today- past simple

He hadn't come today- would be past perfect but how can you say it?- surely it would be correct to say 'He hasn't come today' as today hasn't finished yet- present perfect which is your final example.

Alternatively if you said 'he hadn't come yesterday/this morning' (a time that has already passed) then that is the past perfect.

[EDIT to say: For those tricky grammar problems that we native speakers just don't seem to able to get right I can recommend 'English Grammar in Use' by Raymond Murphy. Cambrdge Uni Press].

For an example I was thinking "When I got to class, I was suprised that John hadn't come today."

For story telling, And good plug! Raymond Murphy, I think I've got every one of his books.

Cheers

Lithobid!

"He didn't come today." - LOL Didn't = Did not, did = simple past of "Do" - my god sometimes when I get into these tenses I get so lost on the simple one's! LOL what an idiot!

Cheers!

Edited March 31, 2009 by Lithobid

[otherstuff1957]

Another good grammar resource is Betty Azar's 'Understanding and Using English Grammar'. Every section starts with a 'grammar box' which has explanations and examples of a specific tense or point of usage, followed by relevant exercises.

While she uses American English spelling, she will always refer to the differences between American and British usages.

[Loaded]

If John didn't come, he needs more than a grammar book to solve his problem.

[RoadRash]

If John didn't come, he needs more than a grammar book to solve his problem.

[Phatcharanan]

Just out of curiosity............what age group are you teaching?

[PeaceBlondie]

"He has come today" - Past Simple? Right?

No, not past simple. Almost surely wrong, as already mentioned. But 'has come' is present perfect, even when used incorrectly.

In practice, past perfect is most often used in sentences containing two clauses, in either order:

He had just come into the room when the power failed. The power failed just as he had come into the room.

I think even when the has part is used with raised inflection for emphasis (He has come), the tense is still present perfect.

[Lithobid]

To Phat the students are 18-28

Ok another one! I love it when students challenge!

Today we were practicing the use of need.

1. Need + passive infinitive : The TV needs to be fixed. The screen needs to be adjusted.

And

2. Need + Verb + ing. : The TV needs fixing. The screen needs adjusting.

Student asks: "What tense are we in? I think 1. is past simple, because of ed ending of verb, and 2. is present continious because of ing."

I said, "I've got no idea, I'm confused! But if I were to take a guess.."

And I wrote on the board.

1. The Tv needs to be fixed. - Present simple

1. The Tv needed to be fixed. - Past Simple

2. The Tv is going to need to be fixed - Future simple

Present continious couldn't be used, because it is passive,

1. He/I/You are fixing the TV. - present continous. "But bot passive!"

2. He has fixed the TV. - past simple "But not passive!"

I argued that it was the passive voice that demanded the conjugation of the verbs in "ed" and "ing" therefore not changing the tense.

If you modify the verb "need", then and only then do you change the "tense" .

They I told my student, I'd ask you guys, cause you're so damned smart!

Thanks for any help

Cheers

Lithobid

Edited April 9, 2009 by Lithobid

[Slip]

This one's a bit trickier. Here's my take but I could be wrong:

1. The TV needs to be fixed: You say two different things but I think you're right on the 2nd one: present simple (needs) with passive (to be done). (Not past simple as you say here

I think 1. is past simple, because of ed ending of verb,

)

2. The TV needs fixing: present simple + present participle.

As for what you put on the board:

1. As mentioned before.

2. Yes - Past simple + passive

3. Yes- Future + passive- but you are complicating it slightly by using 'going to + infinitive, rather than 'will'. Unless you were specifically trying to teach or draw attention to that grammar point you might be safer with 'The tv will need to be fixed'.

4. This may be a regional thing but in England you might hear some say 'that TV is needing fixing"- there's your present continuous with passive. It is grammatically correct I believe. (You would also hear 'That TV is needing fixed' but lets not over-complicate).

5. How about 'The TV needed to be fixed by him'? ('He has fixed the TV' is of course... present perfect- Where's your homework from last lesson, BOY)!

I'm not quite sure I understand your final point but if you are saying 'the tense is held in the verb 'to need' then I agree. The use of 'needed to be fixed' and 'needed fixing' are just different types of passive.

I so well remember the days when I was still teaching English Language: Suddenly you're in the wrong part of grammar town. You've strayed into a blind alley. The mood of the locals is getting ugly and...you've forgotten/ never knew this particularly nasty neighbourhood anyway. Just tell your students that 99.9 percent of native speakers haven't a clue either. Having said that I always quite liked playing around with grammar and even my (relative to yours) younger 15-16 year olds seemed to have the logical capacity to make sense of and apply the rules. They even use to enjoy it- less chance of losing face I guess.

Well all of this is off my head, so if anyone has references to back up/ rubbish what I say please do.

Anyway good luck

[Lithobid]

This one's a bit trickier. Here's my take but I could be wrong:

1. The TV needs to be fixed: You say two different things but I think you're right on the 2nd one: present simple (needs) with passive (to be done). (Not past simple as you say here

I think 1. is past simple, because of ed ending of verb,

)

2. The TV needs fixing: present simple + present participle.

As for what you put on the board:

1. As mentioned before.

2. Yes - Past simple + passive

3. Yes- Future + passive- but you are complicating it slightly by using 'going to + infinitive, rather than 'will'. Unless you were specifically trying to teach or draw attention to that grammar point you might be safer with 'The tv will need to be fixed'.

4. This may be a regional thing but in England you might hear some say 'that TV is needing fixing"- there's your present continuous with passive. It is grammatically correct I believe. (You would also hear 'That TV is needing fixed' but lets not over-complicate).

5. How about 'The TV needed to be fixed by him'? ('He has fixed the TV' is of course... present perfect- Where's your homework from last lesson, BOY)!

I'm not quite sure I understand your final point but if you are saying 'the tense is held in the verb 'to need' then I agree. The use of 'needed to be fixed' and 'needed fixing' are just different types of passive.

I so well remember the days when I was still teaching English Language: Suddenly you're in the wrong part of grammar town. You've strayed into a blind alley. The mood of the locals is getting ugly and...you've forgotten/ never knew this particularly nasty neighbourhood anyway. Just tell your students that 99.9 percent of native speakers haven't a clue either. Having said that I always quite liked playing around with grammar and even my (relative to yours) younger 15-16 year olds seemed to have the logical capacity to make sense of and apply the rules. They even use to enjoy it- less chance of losing face I guess.

Well all of this is off my head, so if anyone has references to back up/ rubbish what I say please do.

Anyway good luck

Thanks again for you're superb advice. My student was really convinced that because "ed" and "ing" were being used that it was P.S. and P.C. tenses, and I was not really sure! I love it when my students challenge me, hel_l in Thailand most of the time it's just a group of 25 smiling nodding heads whether they understand it or not! It's great to have a 22 year old college student adamant on getting things right. I encourage it!

In fact for those of you who are reading this, I've found that 10/10 times I don't know something the best thing to do is say "Wow Jimmy good question! I don't know either, let's figure it out." Immediately you make yourself a partner with the student and become a team to figure out the problem instead of shakily insisting your correct on something you're not quite sure of.

Thanks again slip! You've helped iron out another for me.

Cheers

Lithobid

[Slip]

Lol

I reckon if you have a class-full of 18-20 years olds who are asking you these kinds of questions, then you have something just right!

It seems to me that the technique you describe would be an excellent device. There are (sometimes logical) rules to grammar and you can work on that with an older child/ adult. In my experience adults revel in this kind of activity. You know that not all of them will so you'd use it as part of your varied method- just the easy bit yeah?.

[F4UCorsair]

Then a simple sentence popped into my head and I couldn't for the life of me think of how to put it into the past tense.

"He didn't come today" - Present Simple

"He hadn't come today" - Past Perfect - Right?

"He has come today" - Past Simple? Right?

I'm no teacher, but a keen student of the language, and my take on this is that # 1 is no more than a negative statement.

# 2 is a variation of the first, but still a negative statement.

# 3 is about OK, I think, but I would prefer to say "He came today", but in that case 'today' implies present tense in spite of the past tense verb 'came', so perhaps "He came yesterday" would be more correct, or "He has already come today".

[PeaceBlondie]

"He didn't come today" - Present Simple

NO - PAST SIMPLE

"He hadn't come today" - Past Perfect - Right?

NO - PAST PERFECT

"He has come today" - Past Simple? Right?

NO - PRESENT PERFECT

You must be kidding. Right?