Search results for 'tag:Difference between tag:Tenses' matching tags 'Difference between' and 'Tenses'

Re: I really don't get it :(

CalifJim — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:01:42 GMT

You don't normally say: I say I don't like cats. You just say: I don't like cats.

But supposing you did say such a thing,

a) My general opinion is that I don't like cats. > Your opinion on cats is that you don't like them.

b) I am hereby informing you, in case you haven't understood it from the words that have just now been coming out of my mouth, that I don't like cats. > Ah! So the words you are just now forming with your mouth mean that you don't like cats.

_____

The paraphrasing of one set of sentences after another is not going to do any good. Each verb and each expression has its own ways of showing a difference between the PS and the PC version. You will have to continue this exercise for the rest of your life before you reach the end of all possible pairs. It's better just to pay attention to the contexts in which these forms are used. If you have been speaking English already for many years, you may have already developed so much ability to communicate, even without always selecting the correct tenses, that it will be very difficult for you to pay attention to as much detail as is necessary to master the tenses.

Re: I really don't get it :(

anglista2008 — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:40:09 GMT

CalifJim
anglista2008
a) When we're getting familiar with a language, we may say we're picking it up. (why on earth the present continuous twice?)
and
b) When we get familiar with a language, we may say we pick it up.
There is no good reason to break the parallelism, so in both cases the same tense is used in both parts of the sentence.
Why would you define an action in a tense different from the tense given in describing the action originally? That would be like saying:
Dining out is when you went to the restaurant.
Such mixtures can create so much incoherence that they are impossible for the reader to follow.
CJ

1. then... is there any difference at all, between saying such a sentence in tPS than in tPC? does it mean exactly the same when I say (again, or 'when I'm saying' ?)

a) when we get familiar...
b) when we're getting familiar...

2.coming back to the 'work' issue... I guess there's not much of a difference between saying "I work for/in/at(?) the AT&T" and "I'm working for/in/at(?) the AT&T" ?

thanks, best wishes!

use of video at class-ideas

linguaprof — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:12:44 GMT

Hi! This is something I wrote for our teachers in Romania, I am sure many of you will find these ideas/tricks useful. I have a huge experience with using videos at class and I think it is esential for effective&interesting classes.

Use of video

Advantages
- more interesting and varied classes
- more "authentic" speaking exercises
- more opportunities for students to speak
- possibility for the tired teacher to take a short rest while
students watching the video-but don't use it as a simple "time
filler"!
- intensive "production" speaking exercises
- videos can be used for both accuracy and fluency type of
exercises

Watching 3-5 minutes, then:
- students asking each other questions-open and closed
- the teacher asking the students questions-open and closed
- the teacher saying sentences about the video which are not
true, the students have to correct him/her
- the students have to say true/ untrue sentences about the
video
- the teacher starts a sentence about the video, the students
have to complete the sentence giving true or untrue information.
- students might be asked to continue the story- they can
write the continuation down, or say it directly, depending on their
level

- depending on the students' level and speaking skills the
teacher can direct the activities- for example students will ask
questions only with Do they haveâ¦?, or Are thereâ¦? Or say sentences
with There areâ¦., in this way " Production" speaking exercises with
a video can be used teach a specific grammar structure. Don't forget
that interrogative mood is more difficult for your students, so for
the beginning ask them to say questions starting with the same
structure.

If you are tired, you can let your students note down things about
the video while watching it for 6-7 minutes, and then tell you what
they have just seen.

"Stop and go "exercises- these can be used in an extremely intensive
way to teach speaking. The exercises can be the same as at point 1,
but the teacher uses "frozen" pictures. In a 3-4 minute video, we
can find at least 50-60 suggestive images that can
be "authentically" used to provoke speaking.
We can stop the video repeatedly in the middle of a sentence,
students can be asked to continue it somehow.
We can ask students to predict what is going to happen in the next
moments- present tenses can be used too, not only future, so the
lack of appropriate grammar usage is not a problem.

Using DVDs with English subtitles
These can be used mostly with pre-intermediate and upper students.
The students can watch a 4-6 minutes video, with subtitles, then
- teacher can stop the DVD time by time, and analyze the
sentence that you heard and which can be seen on the screen). As we
discussed a our training, a sentence like "She hasn't discussed it
with her mother yet." can be analyzed according to the four language
systems and we can teach grammar vocabulary, functions or phonology
by it- in this case grammar especially. At lower levels it is
preferable to teach just vocabulary or one type of grammar
structure, at intermediate and higher levels students might like the
mixture of learning different systems and skills.
- students can play the role of the teacher, they can use the
remote control and instruct other students what to do (clever
children love these kind of situations), or "to teach" structures

Watching a "mute" video
- students can comment what they see in the pictures
- students can try to say what the characters say in the
pictures

Listening to the video, without watching
- students can imagine what is shown on the screen wile
listening to a commentary or people speaking on the video

Videos to introduce a topic
This often needs preparation, and a wider range of videos available
so that it can be of real help. Used well, it can be an
excellent "starting point" for a class- for conversational classes
especially.

These are a few ideas about using video at class- for a creative
teacher these activities don't need too much preparation. Don't
forget to make a difference between accuracy and fluency exercises,
and DON"T CORRECT your students while they try to express
themselves. Video lessons like the ones from the REWARD interactive
CDs accompanied by Video Resource Pack for teachers can help you
create even more professional classes

Re: Present perfect simple and past perfect simple

Anonymous — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 08:32:16 GMT

lemon
Hi, can someone please explain the difference between those two tenses and when I have to use which?
thx in advance!

Present perfect is used when some action happened in the past but result remains now, action completed in the recent past but result not finished yet,and
past perfect is used when any action happened before another past action.

Re: Reported speech?

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:30:13 GMT

I think it comes down to what you intended to say/convey, mixing tenses, and understanding the difference between 'will' and 'would.' If you go strictly off of your premise that there's a person seeking to buy a pen from you and you'll have the final say, then you must use 'would'--'will' means it is a definite that's set to occur in the future (whereas 'would' is conditional).

Re: Tenses

Doll — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:54:33 GMT

My try:

Uses of phrase "found out":
(the city is going to raise taxes and the action of raising taxes hasn't iniitated.)
1) I found out that the city is going to/will/is planning to raise taxes.
I don't see much difference with this:
I found out that the city ~~would~~ will raise taxes. The choice of tenses here depends on the meaning you want to give us. If you mean that there is a more planning in this situation, "going to or planning to " can be used. But I prefer "will" with find out because "will" means something more immeadiate or something decided or learned at the time of speaking.

(It's news that my friend is going to get married and he hasn't married.)
2) I found out my friend is going to/will/is planning to get married.
I don't see much difference with this:
I found out my friend ~~would~~ will get married. Hmm, here you know that he is going to get married. You have an initial informationa bout this so planning to or going to will be more proper.

Use of word "said":
3) My friend said that the city will/ is going to raise taxes.
I see a difference with this and the sentence below seems to be OKbut not as good as the above sentence Why? Is that because raising taxes is still in a planning stage and has not been instituted?
My friend said that the city would raise taxes. I would say that this sentence is wrong. "said that, found out that" is a past tense in form but their meanings is relarted with present events so you shouldn't use a past tense if you are talking about a present event. The difference between will and going to is simply can be explanied as I told you before. If you want a detailed information, search them in the search box above. You will find threads discussing it.
4) My friend said the city will/is going to raise taxes after July 7th.
My friend said that the city would be raising taxes after the date of July 7th.?? -- how would you rewrite this with shifting-back the tense when a future date is involved.

Hmm, it is simple. Changing the tenses will help you. My friend said that the city was going to/would raise taxes after July 7th. (Reported speech) You report the news to your friend so there is nothing wrong with tense change.

Grammar help

Intrigue — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:35:20 GMT

Hi all,

I have problem with tenses,espeacially present perfect,present perfect continuous,future perfect,future perfect continuous.What is the difference between-

I have worked here since June and I am working here since June

"I will have done" and "I will have been doing".

Also,please recommend me some good sites from where i should learn.

from abc

Anonymous — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:14:32 GMT

Hello friends,

I want to know to difference between past tense and present perfect. I always get confused with these pls help me.Give some examples.

Re: tense - why wrong?

CalifJim — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:48:07 GMT

26TMNTJG2PG
A job applicant using the sentence, "I like employers that (instead of who) take good care of their employees", is facing a risk of his/her application being turned down should his/her prospective employer consider such use (of 'that') as inappropriate; and the applicant will be left with no chance to defend himself/herself since normally no reason will be given for the rejection.

This claim is outrageously "over-the-top"!!! No employer in his right mind would reject a candidate on the basis of a single word. Employers are much more interested in whether the candidate can do the job. Word choice is not at issue in 99.9% of jobs typically available to job seekers. (The 0.1% represents jobs as editors and the like.) Barely a single employer in ten thousand is even aware of a difference between who and that in the context referenced -- and even those would have to have the issue specifically brought to their attention before they might notice that the prospective employee had used one or the other in the context of an interview.

Re: wife/girlfriend...advance/further

Dawnstorm — Thu, 29 May 2008 16:45:56 GMT

Grammar Geek
I think Nona's example about talking about your mother when she was a child and still referring to her as your mother is a good analogy.

First,. let me say that I agree usage-wise Nona and you. I also think that the mother-example is a good one - but it's not a perfect one.

It's a good one, because it demonstrates the difference between the time of action and the time of speaking. Noun references are routinely rooted in the present, even in past tense senteces, and the mother-example demonstrates that.

But there is a cognitive difference in "married his wife", as there is a semantic relationship between the verb "marry" and the noun "wife", in so far as the act of marrying results in wife-status. So it's quite possible that individual speakers (native speakers, even) have an intuitive correctness condition that doesn't allow the word "wife" as the object of the verb "marry", quite independent of tense. To summarise, I think part of the argument is lexical: what sort of words can the verb "marry" select as direct objects?

The thing is, disliking "wife" as the direct object of "marry" is reasonable. It's somewhat similar to "The Queen knighted the knight." (but without the etymological close relation that adds to the oddness). Or, "The army conscripted the soldier." Or "The jury pronounced the prisoner guilty."

It's an interesting discussion, really. Since "married his wife" doesn't sound odd to me at all (I'm not a native speaker), and since native speakers agree, I wonder why the tense relation between verb and noun-naming can override nosensical direct-object relation. (I do think it's a disjunction between the time-levels that's at issue here; the noun-reference is firmly in the present - referring to a specific person.)