?

Log in

No account? Create an account
recent witterings other journals calendar about me espresso coco earlier earlier next next
Trouble with tenses - almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea
if I had to explain, you wouldn't understand
dakegra
dakegra
Trouble with tenses
I'm getting lost in my tenses and viewpoints, I think

"She turned it over, examining it from all sides."

should it be
"She turned it over, and examined it from all sides."

same with
"Monty agreed, taking the parcel from her and examining it himself."

should it be:
"Monty agreed. He took the parcel from her and examined it himself."
19 thoughts or leave a thought
Comments
roobarb From: roobarb Date: August 12th, 2010 08:37 pm (UTC) (linky)
I like 1 and 4

dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 01:07 pm (UTC) (linky)
me too - I think they go quite well together.
elaby From: elaby Date: August 12th, 2010 09:52 pm (UTC) (linky)
Both are grammatically correct. I do agree with roobarb about liking 1 and 4 best :) I think it's because the two of them together have nicely different sentence structure. I think your "-ing" examples give more of an impression of the actions taking place simultaneously (Molly is turning it and examining it at the same time) where as the "-ed and -ed" examples separate the actions (Molly turned it over, then after turning it over she examined it from all sides).

:D Grammar is the best!
_generica_ From: _generica_ Date: August 12th, 2010 10:47 pm (UTC) (linky)
Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. :)
elaby From: elaby Date: August 12th, 2010 11:34 pm (UTC) (linky)
Hee! Yay, go us :D
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 01:08 pm (UTC) (linky)
I was worried that one was 'had done' and the other was 'doing', if that makes sense?

Then I posted up here and carried on writing. PERIL happened (did caitirin show you the piece?)
elaby From: elaby Date: August 13th, 2010 03:32 pm (UTC) (linky)
YES OMG IT WAS AWESOME *rattles you* I really, really liked it! Also had a major Doctor Who scary moment at one of Monty's lines, which increased the overall tension like crazy XD
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 03:49 pm (UTC) (linky)
the "I'm sorry" bit?

Hee! It was fun to write. I had to take a break though, it went in a completely unexpected direction. Curse that Zenn!
elaby From: elaby Date: August 13th, 2010 04:42 pm (UTC) (linky)
That was it! XD I can't wait to read more!
lebeautemps From: lebeautemps Date: August 12th, 2010 10:08 pm (UTC) (linky)
It's all good. They just mean different things, is all.
pkdan From: pkdan Date: August 12th, 2010 10:26 pm (UTC) (linky)
You don't need the comma in #2. One subject and two verbs. (or is that one of those Queen's English vs. Dirty American Bastardization of English? For the record, I follow the British style for quotation marks. Makes much more sense to me.)

#1 is better than #2, but I don't know which is better of the last two. It might depends on context. Is he agreeing with something independent of taking the parcel (which is my guess), or does his agreement have to do with the action of him taking and examining the parcel?
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 01:10 pm (UTC) (linky)
He's agreeing with her comment on the parcel, as he's examining it himself.
chiller From: chiller Date: August 12th, 2010 10:26 pm (UTC) (linky)
I don't have a problem with any of them. The reader understands, as s/he reads 1 and 3, that the timeline after the comma belongs to the timeline before the comma.

"I sat in your room, wearing your shoes."
    ^Past                 ^ present, but a subclause of the "sat in your room" statement.

You could replace the comma with "while" and the addition of that conjunction would make the sentence work - but the sentence flows better as you have written it, with a comma in place of "while".
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 01:11 pm (UTC) (linky)
that's made things clearer. Thanks. :-)
boliviafang From: boliviafang Date: August 13th, 2010 02:10 am (UTC) (linky)
I'm no expert, but I think the first sentences are much more engaging. I'm sure there's a rule that allows for this, and maybe someone's explained it already. The present pluperfect reflexive, or the past particulate subjunctive, or the indeterminate perambulatory pessitive, or something.

I don't think the first sentences are wrong, is what I'm saying, and while I wouldn't think a thing of the second sentences if I saw them alone, seeing them against the first makes me realize the seconds are ... leaden, somehow.

...ooh, "leaden"... I like that.
mutter mutter
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 01:12 pm (UTC) (linky)
leaden is good. I like leaden.

I'm still contemplating the next move in our game. I have three (I think) possible scenarios. I might write up all three and let you choose.

:-)
paula_abroad From: paula_abroad Date: August 13th, 2010 06:53 am (UTC) (linky)
thanks for the lesson. love posts like this. :)


on a unrelated note - dave, i thought you might like this
dakegra From: dakegra Date: August 13th, 2010 08:46 am (UTC) (linky)
Ooh, I saw that via someone on Twitter (are you on twitter?)

Fabulous, aren't they? So much time and effort and love and attention gone into each one. Utterly brilliant.
paula_abroad From: paula_abroad Date: August 13th, 2010 09:01 am (UTC) (linky)
(not on twitter)

19 thoughts or leave a thought