0

Is anything wrong about this phrase "We build software solutions designed for scalability"? I think there is, because the tenses are not consistent.

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    Designed is not acting as a verb.
    – Noah
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:29
  • 3
    @Noah Sure it is. It just isn’t a finite one. Participles, gerunds, and infinitives can all introduce verbal phrases in English, which makes them verbs, verbs that just happen to function as substantives or modifiers. Consider: “Finishing it early is what makes me happiest”; the direct object of finishing is it, and only verbs have direct objects, so finishing is without question a verb. It is also acting as a substantive here. You can do the same with the other non-finite forms.
    – tchrist ♦
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:34
  • @tchrist- I thought participles were not acting as verbs. Thanks for clearing that up.
    – Noah
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:49
  • If nothing else, one could argue that the solutions are designed before they are built, resolving the tense problem.
    – Anton Sherwood
    Commented Aug 6 at 4:01

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
10

There is absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with that sentence. A participle that introduces a verbal phrase is under no obligation to agree with the tense of the main verb. That just would not be sensible.

Examples of the past participle used with non-past verbs:

  • We’re looking for people interested in birding.
  • English is the world language spoken by the most number of individuals as a second language.
  • I won’t fix a roof damaged by hail.
  • You should drink only water boiled for at least one minute.
  • Broken windows must be repaired immediately.

Examples of the present participle used with non-present verbs:

  • I saw you sleeping in the park.
  • I always ate my ice cream with it dripping down my chin.
  • I didn’t want him contemplating any other possibility.
  • Running in the morning was never my passion.
Improve this answer
3
  • 2
    There is absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with explaining why the sentence is fine. It is obviously for what reason he's unsure about the correctness of his sentence, so why don't say a few words about it if you really want to answer that question...
    – Em1
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:15
  • 1
    @Em1 I have noticed that a lot of experienced users on this site answer the question first and then elaborate on it via a series of edits. It's oddly entertaining watching some of them punch in their edits before SE decides that it has been too long and a new revision is warranted. As you can probably tell, that's what tchrist has done so here as well :)
    – coleopterist
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:26
  • 1
    @coleopterist Because I only ever seem to gain reputation for accepted answers, not for merely upvoted ones, I often come back and improve the original. :) [yes, I know why]
    – tchrist ♦
    Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 13:32
5

Designed for scalability is a participle clause, postmodifying solutions. Designed is a non-finite verb, which means it shows no tense or person. The clause can be replaced with a finite relative clause with a passive verb: We build software solutions that are designed for scalability. That may help you understand why there is no inconsistency in the verbs.

Improve this answer
0

It's an example of a reduced relative clause in the passive. As someone mentioned above, the sentence could read 'we build software solutions that are designed for scalability'. So 'designed' is a past participle here.

I assume the 'actor' here is 'we' anyway? So the sentence would read better as 'we build and design software solutions for scalability'.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .