http://www.englishforums.com/English/LinguisticsDiscussionForum/Forum35.htmGet into the nitty-gritty of the language.enXMOD (Build: 3607.32596)http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#805093Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:52:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:805093Anonymous0http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#805093http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-805093.xmlNot to the level of your university level reply.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#805072Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:32:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:805072MrPedantic1http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#805072http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-805072.xmlI know you do, old chap, because we've conversed in it. MrPhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#804079Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:48:20 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:804079Anonymous2http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#804079http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-804079.xmlSo are you saying that most ESL teachers speak the L1 of their students?http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#803543Thu, 02 Jul 2009 22:11:12 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:803543MrPedantic3http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/2/jjpqq/Post.htm#803543http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-803543.xmlIt was in answer to: From which language level up would I be able to relay such information using such words? MrPhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#802373Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:57:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:802373Anonymous4http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#802373http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-802373.xmlYou would use your students' native language, of course. Me? Or do you mean "one"?http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#802350Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:05:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:802350MrPedantic5http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#802350http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-802350.xmlFrom which language level up would I be able to relay such information using such words? You would use your students' native language, of course. MrPhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801621Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:21:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801621Anonymous6http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801621http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801621.xmlIf you wish. You might add that the precise "time" of the verb is often determined by the drift and nature of the sentence, rather than the verbal form itself. MrP From which language level up would I be able to relay such information using such words?http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801607Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:00:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801607MrPedantic7http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801607http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801607.xmlIf you wish. You might add that the precise "time" of the verb is often determined by the drift and nature of the sentence, rather than the verbal form itself. MrPhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801597Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:28:18 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801597Anonymous8http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801597http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801597.xml<You merely need to explain that earlier indicative and subjunctive forms were superseded by the modern past tense forms. > Using those words?http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801585Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:51:49 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801585MrPedantic9http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801585http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801585.xmlYou merely need to explain that earlier indicative and subjunctive forms were superseded by the modern past tense forms. It should take 30 seconds or so. (The apparent anomaly is not unique to English, by the way. For instance, French students already use the imperfect in the if-clause of their first language "second" conditionals.) MrPhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801314Tue, 30 Jun 2009 06:04:49 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801314Anonymous10http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801314http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801314.xmlNot likely, so negligible damage. If you think otherwise, prove it. Well I wasn't thinking of going to court over this. It's just a question coming from years of working in ESL and hearing students ask why some past tense use does not refer to the past. I often get intermediate students asking that.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801235Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:31:16 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:801235Kooyeen11http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htm#801235http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-801235.xmlWhat damage do you think such explanations of the past tense have done to ESL students learning? Negligible damage, I think. That statement alone is not sufficient to influence learners in general, taken out of context. To have an effect, learners would have had to take that short sentence literally, understand its meaning exactly, generalize it to every context, remember it, and then not let anything or anyone else affect their cognition with respect to that "rule". Not likely, so negligible damage. If you think otherwise, prove it.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htmMon, 29 Jun 2009 08:58:05 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:800529Anonymous12http://www.englishforums.com/English/PastTenseTension/jjpqq/post.htmhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/comments35-800529.xmlI understand that for the past 100 years or so most traditional grammar books have defined the English past tense in this way: the past tense expresses or indicates a time that is in the past . What damage do you think such explanations of the past tense have done to ESL students learning?