Timeline for Can verb tense be changed mid-sentence for something that still exists?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2015 at 19:37 | comment | added | Fattie | I love old questions! | |
| Sep 19, 2015 at 19:35 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A | @JoeBlow You realize that this question is two years old, but anyway, I hope you have read my all answer and not just dwelt on the last citation. Because I think we are saying the same thing. | |
| Sep 19, 2015 at 19:28 | comment | added | Fattie | "I knew that the sky is blew" very simply means, yesterday (for some reason the issue arose, and) I knew that the sky is blue. "Yesterday my father asked me what color the Horsehead Nebula is. I knew that the Horsehead Nebula is green. So I answered 'Yes I do.'" "It's that simple." "the sky is blue" is a GENERAL COMMENT on "the sky". Much as "the McDonald's log is red". (Omitting the 'that' changes nothing in this.) | |
| Aug 17, 2013 at 21:39 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A | @skymninge I beg to differ. I knew the sky was blue means at a specific point in the past you held this belief, it does not necessarily follow you have since changed your idea. Let us pick another example, "When I was 10 I loved reading books." Does this exclude the possibility of my enjoying books later in life? No, why should it? If however, I say: "When I was 10 I used to love reading books" it would be correct to presume today I no longer read or enjoy books. Likewise: I knew the sky used to be blue OR I used to know the sky was blue means today it is no longer true. | |
| Aug 13, 2013 at 12:39 | comment | added | skymningen | You're right, I should have written " He was trying to make me believe the sky was originally red". But I still think "I knew the sky is blue" can be correct after that. I knew it then, it still is blue now. | |
| Aug 13, 2013 at 10:18 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A | You are only reporting the words said by another person, if it is direct speech, then it would be legitimate to write: I was only four years old at that time. He was trying to make me believe the sky was originally red, but I replied indignantly, "I know the sky is blue!" | |
| Aug 13, 2013 at 10:16 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A | I disagree. When referring to the past and specifically retelling an anecdote, a story or an episode you need to use the past tense. In your example it would be far more natural to say: I was only four years old at that time. He was trying to make me believe the sky was originally red, but I knew the sky was blue. This structure is called reported speech or indirect speech. | |
| Aug 13, 2013 at 10:00 | comment | added | skymningen | I don't think that the certainty has to have changed. If, for example, you recall something and want to make a point of the fact that at that time you already knew that the sky is blue (and might still know that), this works perfectly fine. "I was only four years old at that time. He was trying to make me believe the sky is originally red, but I knew the sky is blue." Or, you could use it as an idiom for somebody trying to make you believe something, but common sense tells you it is wrong. So the blue sky is just something, everybody knows. | |
| Aug 12, 2013 at 22:40 | history | edited | Mari-Lou A | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 42 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2013 at 22:30 | history | answered | Mari-Lou A | CC BY-SA 3.0 |