Timeline for Why is continuous-future tense being used in conversation, rather than present tense? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 5 at 20:06 | comment | added | Hamid | thank you guys, very much! | |
| Sep 5 at 15:27 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Yosef explains that all the forms mentioned are grammatical; one just has to put up with the fact (or hopefully be grateful for the fact) that "...OK, thanks! I should go. Goodbye!" means virtually exactly the same as "... OK, thanks! But I really must be going now.... So ... I'll see you, then!" but that the latter comes across as less abrupt, more considerate. It is a standard conversational use after 'should' and 'must': "I must/should be going". // Since all variants are grammatical, this boils down to polite forms of (ie variants in) communication: communication skills. | |
| Sep 5 at 10:55 | comment | added | gaufridus | @Hamid You might hear this sort of ‘distancing’ when someone wants to put something off, or when the speaker has some idea of a future time in mind when the action might be necessary, but only if something doesn’t interrupt the current course of events in such a way that it becomes unnecessary. It might also just be idiomatic: American cops often say ‘I’m gonna hafta ask you for your licence’ even though ‘I ask you for your licence’ conveys essentially the same thing. The hafta displaces responsibility and the gonna distances the subject from the action. | |
| Sep 5 at 10:39 | comment | added | Hamid | @gaufridus, Thanks! regarding the second example, the obligation is already there, because of using of "have to". why should there be any need for gonna (or going to)? | |
| Sep 5 at 10:22 | comment | added | gaufridus | The second example uses going to to place the sense of obligation into the future. This is the sort of going to that could be contracted to gonna and doesn’t really have anything to do with motion (it’s a spatial metaphor for the passage of time). But the construction is probably used here more because it allows the speaker to distance himself from something he’s not particularly eager to do. | |
| Sep 5 at 10:20 | comment | added | gaufridus | The first example does not seem to fit the usual distinction between a simple and progressive verb. The progressive is probably used simply because the phrase (so and so) should go sounds very serious and can imply that something is off either with the situation or with the person being there. The progressive avoids this connotation. | |
| Sep 5 at 10:11 | comment | added | Hamid | Thank you for useful comments. @EdwinAshworth: Thank you. But actually my question was not about social skills. Yes, adding "but" is less abrupt. But my question was related to the difference between "...... should" and ".... should be ..ing...." . Why continuous present tense is being used, rather than just present tense? | |
| Sep 4 at 18:33 | history | edited | Hamid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 20 characters in body
|
| Sep 4 at 18:32 | history | closed |
Edwin Ashworth Greybeard fev |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Sep 4 at 14:40 | comment | added | Scott Seidman | I hear both forms with some regularity. | |
| Sep 4 at 12:49 | review | Close votes | |||
| Sep 4 at 18:32 | |||||
| Sep 4 at 12:42 | comment | added | ermanen | It is just more casual. | |
| Sep 4 at 12:31 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | ... Though I’m voting to close this question, but only because I believe it's a better fit for Interpersonal Skills.SE. It's a very good question. | |
| Sep 4 at 12:30 | history | edited | Edwin Ashworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Sep 4 at 12:27 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Yosef is spot on. Even "...OK, thanks! I should be going. Goodbye!" Sounds abrupt, dismissive. I'd add more padding, including reflective pauses and a mitigating 'but' to concede one is unilaterally changing the subject: "... OK, thanks! But I really must be going now.... So ... I'll see you, then!" ['Goodbye', especially when stressed, has a perhaps over-formal, over-final ring to it. Other sign-offs are available and far more common. | |
| Sep 4 at 12:27 | comment | added | Yosef Baskin | There is an overlap between culture and language. For English, an extra word here and there adds politeness by being less abrupt: "You're fired." "Get out." You are right that the difference in meaning is small, but padding smooths the message. "I came I saw I conquered" becomes Since arriving, I saw what there was to take in, conquering whatever I could, but that's just me. | |
| Sep 4 at 11:49 | comment | added | JK2 | Why do you call the former as "continuous future tense" and the latter as "present tense"? If the first is "future tense", so is the latter. | |
| Sep 4 at 10:27 | comment | added | Stuart F | english.stackexchange.com/questions/203090/… english.stackexchange.com/questions/392176/… english.stackexchange.com/questions/168367/… english.stackexchange.com/questions/65730/… and more | |
| Sep 4 at 10:07 | history | edited | Hamid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Sep 4 at 10:06 | history | edited | Hamid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 126 characters in body
|
| Sep 4 at 10:06 | history | edited | KillingTime | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 9 characters in body
|
| Sep 4 at 10:04 | history | edited | Hamid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| S Sep 4 at 10:03 | review | First questions | |||
| Sep 4 at 10:06 | |||||
| S Sep 4 at 10:03 | history | asked | Hamid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |