0
Anonymous Posted 20 years ago
Grammar
Past and Present Tense in Same Sentence
Is this acceptable: The dog shook violently, coating us with water.
Or should tense ALWAYS match: The dog shook violently and coated us with water.
If the first is acceptable, please explain the rule of thumb regarding tense usage.
Thanks!
Or should tense ALWAYS match: The dog shook violently and coated us with water.
If the first is acceptable, please explain the rule of thumb regarding tense usage.
Thanks!
Top answer
Hello Anon Your first example is fine. The "coating" clause is a participle clause; the participle is a present participle. When you use a participle clause, the tense of the participle doesn't have to match the tense of the main clause.
- Hello Anon Your first example is fine.
- The "coating" clause is a participle clause; the participle is a present participle.
- When you use a participle clause, the tense of the participle doesn't have to match the tense of the main clause.
- MrP
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
Hello Anon
Your first example is fine.
The "coating" clause is a participle clause; the participle is a present participle.
When you use a participle clause, the tense of the participle doesn't have to match the tense of the main clause.
MrP
Your first example is fine.
The "coating" clause is a participle clause; the participle is a present participle.
When you use a participle clause, the tense of the participle doesn't have to match the tense of the main clause.
MrP
00
Participles don't have tense. There is only one tensed item in the sentence: "shook". So it's not a question of matching tenses. It is the terminology for classifying participles that is to blame. The so-called present and past participles are probably more accurately called the active and passive participles, respectively.
CJ
CJ
00
CalifJimIt is the terminology for classifying participles that is to blame. The so-called present and past participles are probably more accurately called the active and passive participles, respectively.I'd like to agree. But how about "arrived" in "recently arrived immigrants"?
paco
00
Well, that one is obviously not really passive, since "arrive" is intransitive.
But how common is this usage? Can we simply list "arrived" in our lexicon as a plain adjective rather than as a participial form of "arrive"? Or will that lead to too many such entries in our lexicon?
CJ
But how common is this usage? Can we simply list "arrived" in our lexicon as a plain adjective rather than as a participial form of "arrive"? Or will that lead to too many such entries in our lexicon?
CJ
00
Hi CJ
As you know very well, English uses "passive participles" in two ways: (1) passive and (2) perfect tenses. So we have to use many intransitive "passive participles" to make sentences of perfect tenses.
paco
As you know very well, English uses "passive participles" in two ways: (1) passive and (2) perfect tenses. So we have to use many intransitive "passive participles" to make sentences of perfect tenses.
paco
00
Alternately, we have to use many "past participles" to make sentences with passive tenses. 
One is between the devil and deep
One is between the devil and deep
0
Related Questions