有系統地思考「tense」 (Tense系列#2)

 


上週,我在本系列 #1 中解釋了學生思考tense的第一個錯誤方向,這篇我們來看看第二個:


常有學生誤以為現實中的動作,每個都會有一個「固定的tense字形」– 事實上,tense只是文法的一部分,文法則是語言的一部分,而語言只是我們用以「表達現實」的方式,而非現實本身。


我們為句子中的限定動詞(finite verb)選擇 tense(和aspect,即「體貌」)的字形時,考慮「那現實是甚麼」只是最基本,主要其實是要考慮我們想「怎樣」去表達那現實,或我們想去表達關於那現實的甚麼意思,例如,我們要強調關於這現實的甚麼。


因此,同上次討論的那一點一樣,如果不確定某句本身要表達的意思是甚麼,討論如以下兩句中分別的tense字形選擇得正確與否,是沒有意義的:


She swam yesterday. 


She was swimming yesterday. 


限定動詞字形「swam」(簡單過去式)與「was swimming」(過去進行式),都能表達出她昨天游泳的同樣「事實」。


所以,沒有語境的話,兩者都是「正確」的,兩組字形都能表達出這同樣的「事實」。


但是,這些字形還可以呈現其他不同的資訊,例如強調「swin」這動作的不同狀態。


假如講者/作者想表達的只是她曾游泳的「事實」,使用「swam」的字形便更切合這意思。


但如果講者/作者想強調的並非她曾游泳的「事實」,而是她持續進行游泳的這實際行動,那麼「she was swimming」就更適合了。


雖然都是描述同一個「現實事件」,但這些不同的tense和aspect字形,能讓我們把重點放在不同的地方。


你也可以用中文的邏輯去思考,就算中文動詞沒有tense的字形,我們仍會加入一些額外的字詞以表達該動作的「狀態」。例如:


她昨天游了泳


她昨天在游泳


「游了泳」和「在游泳」都有表達出她昨天游泳的「事實」。


但如果我們想把重點放在她昨天游泳的整個「事實」,我們會選擇「游了泳」。


而如果我們想強調該動作的本身,我們應該會說「在游泳」。


不知道本來要傳遞的意思,討論「她昨天游了泳」和「她昨天在游泳」哪個正確是沒有意義的。


重點是,同一個「現實」是可以透過不同的英文tense字形來表達。至於組句時到底選擇哪種字形,取決於我們想表達或強調甚麼,以及是否有某種字形,特別適合那想表達的意思。


也因此,我們在不清楚講者想表達的意思的情況下,便說,例如,「she was swimming yesterday」是錯的,「she swam yesterday」才是對的,非但毫無意義,也對我們學習如何正確使用tense來表達意思沒有幫助。


下次我會再舉一個例子,討論一位學生曾經提出,關於使用「簡單過去式」和「過去完成式」來描述過去事件的問題。


_________


Thinking systematically about “tense”

(Tense series #2)


In #1 of this series last week, I explained the first “unhelpful” way in which students often think about tense. This time, I will explain the second:


Students often misunderstand that there is always one “fixed tense form” attached to any action/event/situation in reality – when, in fact, tense is part of grammar, and grammar is part of language, and language is only our way to “represent” and “express” reality. It is not reality itself.


The tense (and aspect) forms we choose for the finite verb in a sentence depend on what we want to express about reality


So, again, it is meaningless to discuss whether a pair of sentences like the one below is “right” or “wrong” without the intended meaning of the speaker/writer:


She swam yesterday. 


She was swimming yesterday. 


The finite verb forms “swam” (past tense x simple aspect) and “was swimming” (past tense x progressive aspect) can both express the same “reality.”


So, in that sense, both are “correct” – both are forms that can express this “reality.”


However, these forms can express different things – for example, they emphasize different aspects of the action of “swim.”


If the speaker/writer intends to express just the “fact” (事實) that “she swam,” then the form “swam” is more appropriate for this intended meaning. 


But if the speaker/writer intends to highlight not the “fact” that she swam but her physical, continuous action of “swimming,” then “she was swimming” would be more appropriate.


These different tense and aspect forms allow us to highlight different things in what we say, even if we are talking about the same event “in reality.” 


You can think about Chinese in the same way. Although Chinese verbs have no tense forms, we add in extra words to express meanings like the “state” of an action. For example:


她昨天游了泳

她昨天在游泳


Both “游了泳” and “在游泳” can express the same “reality” that “she swam” yesterday.


But, if we want to express the “fact” that she did this more, we would probably say “游了泳.”


And, if we want to highlight the “action” itself, then we would probably say “在游泳.”


Without knowing what intended meaning the speaker wants to express about this “reality,” it is meaningless to discuss whether “她昨天游了泳” or “她昨天在游泳” is “correct.”


The point is that the same “reality” can be adequately expressed by different tense forms in English, but which one we actually choose for a particular sentence depends on what we want to express or highlight, and whether there is a particularly suitable form for that meaning.


As such, thinking that “she was swimming yesterday” is “wrong” whereas “she swam yesterday” is “right” – without knowing what the intended meaning of the speaker is – is meaningless and unhelpful in learning how to use tense correctly to express meaning. 


Next time, I will give you another example of this by discussing some questions that a student asked me about using “simple past” vs. “past perfect” in describing past events.


Comments

Popular Posts

及物與不及物動詞對:「Lay」vs.「Lie」(+其他例子)

有被動語態的動名詞組(Gerund Phrases): 「Being Chosen for a Flight Mission」 ✈️

比利時巧克力 - 「Belgian」Chocolate 🍫

2025 New Year's Resolutions?

你有「完善的計劃」(“Robust” Plan)來學習英文嗎?

No Doubt… 不容置疑(?)