There is nothing ungrammatical about this sentence. It contains a kind of non-sequitur. There are many of these. For example, zeugma involves a kind of non-sequitur. An example of this is as follows.
He walked into the kitchen wrapped in thought and a bath robe.
Here the zeugma involves the same word (wrapped) first metaphorically and then literally....
Strictly speaking, the title sentence is grammatical, but it sounds unidiomatic because there's no connection between the two predicates. To give some similar examples,
I am raising money and running for president
sounds fine, but
I am lifting weights and running for president
sounds funny. Similarly,
I am tired and thinking in circles
As with each other answer so far, I’ll confirm that the title sentence is perfectly grammatical. There is no real ambiguity or doubt on that score. In contrast to other answers, though, I find nothing odd, funny-sounding, or unidiomatic about the title sentence. I do not consider it a non sequitur.
In the example sentence, “I am tired and thinking in ...
The "historical present" doesn't have to be used in all sentences. It's fine to use the present tense "on all subsequent pages" despite using the past tense in the first two sentences. The customer's complaint isn't justified, so I would simply ignore the complaint and leave the tense as it is.
Leaving out "Once upon a time" would substantially change the ...
Both I feel fine and I'm feeling fine are grammatical (although this nGram shows the former is a lot more common than the latter).
Swan in Practical English Usage (p455) in 'Present tenses: Advanced points - section 7: I feel / I'm feeling' says:
Verbs that refer to physical feelings (e.g. feel, hurt, ache) can
often be used in simple or progressive ...
Hear, see, watch, notice and similar verbs of perception can be followed by object + infinitive without to or object + -ing form.
There is usually a difference of meaning between the two structures.
The infinitive is used after these verbs when we want to say that we hear or see the whole of an action or event. The gerund –ing form is used to suggest that ...
There are four different senses of the Perfect construction.
This is an example of the Existential sense.
Existential Perfect: Lola has seen “Casablanca” 23 times.
Describes at least a single occurrence of some past event.
As for using the perfect versus the present
We've often talked about emigrating.
We often talk about emigrating.
Both can be used to ...
They all mean the same thing but there is a bit of difference in the way that they are used.
The most general, and the most widely used, is "He's going to fly tomorrow". This can be used with no background, for example "My son needs a flight bag quickly, he's going to fly tomorrow": alhough it can also be used with background, for example "My son is going ...
If Ring toss is still your favorite game (of all games you ever played), you say:
My favorite game is Ring toss.
If Ring toss was your favorite game from the games available at that specific Funfair, but it is not your favorite game in general, you say:
My favorite game was Ring toss.
If the same rules apply no matter where and when the game is ...
The past simple is the only option for the verb belonged as the action is complete and there is a time reference (before us).
Past simple verbs often have explicit time references to show they are complete
They left the town 10 years ago
I went to the shops yesterday
Past simple verbs also have implicit time references, such as in your example.
There is nothing wrong with it, especially in colloquial English. Among friends,
Friend: Let's go out to the bar.
Me: I am tired and doing my homework.
[I can't go out.] I am tired and [, besides, I am] doing my homework.
I have multiple reasons reinforcing why I can't go out
But also, I suppose it could be used the next morning...
If you want to talk about an action as something that caused something, then the action is functioning as a noun (it's a thing that is doing stuff). A noun formed from a verb is a gerund. So it would be "Spending my life ..."
You could say:
Over the past ten years, I've eaten lunch at 1 pm.
Recently, I've been eating lunch at 1 pm.
If it's just about a single past action and you have a finished time phrase, use the past simple:
I had lunch at 1 pm.
If it's habitual, present simple would do:
I have lunch at 1 pm.
And no, we CAN'T use the present perfect ...
Let me break down the following [given] sentence.
The sentence is: "When a static or dynamic function call FC is evaluated with respect to a static context SC and a dynamic context DC, the result is obtained as follows.". This sentence is quoted from 188.8.131.52 Evaluating Static and Dynamic Function Calls
Static or dynamic function call FC is the noun.
"Call" isn't a verb here; "is evaluated" and "is obtained" are the verbs.
A "function call" is a thing, in this case a procedure, which is either unchanging (static) or dynamic (changing, depending on conditions).
If I rewrite the sentence for clarity, I get something like this:
"A function call (FC) can be evaluated in static (SC) or dynamic (DC) context. ...
The verb interest has the following obligatorily transitive senses [Collins CoBuild Dictionary; modified]:
interest (3) verb
If something interests you, it attracts your attention so that you
want to learn or hear more about it or continue doing it.
Animation had always interested me. [S + verb + DO, noun/pronoun]
[This passivises, to say ...
The premise of this question is based on a couple of false assumptions.
As a verb
The present tense of the verb unassigned is unassign. It's not as common, but it's perfectly reasonable to apply the un- prefix to some verbs in order to form their opposite.
From "Assign and unassign" at Pearson:
Assign and unassign
You can unassign an assignment ...
Well, my own understanding from within the English language is that they could easily be considered as falling under the generic present tense's state outside of time. The routes run over and over and over, and so one could use the simple present in the same way literature is described in the present because a book's events are outside time and new again for ...
If the clause after knew or realized is a general truth, or more specifically, if it is still true, we can use either the past or the present.
This website, talking about backshifting, says
Backshifting occurs not only with indirect speech, but also with reported feelings and thoughts expressed frequently with verbs such as know, think, realize, and ...
Below is the explanation given by the author.
The present simple "I ... enjoy working here" is always true. I enjoyed working here when I started, I enjoy it now, I will enjoy it in the future. The company looks after its staff, the building is air-conditioned, the salary is good, the work is interesting.
The present continuous "I am ... enjoying working ...
Logically, they mean exactly the same thing.
But in practice, thy have a slight difference.
If someone is being negative, feeling that they can't accomplish what they want, you would respond with something that matches their mood: "nothing is impossible".
You deny their negative attitude with another negative.
But if someone is being hopeful about what ...
I am quoting from a site named "veritasprep.com", which guides students preparing for exams. It gives the following answer to the question "Is it incorrect to use multiple verb tenses in a sentence?" dated August 1, 2017. I give below only a part of the answer.
Tense consistency - We do not switch tenses when there is no time change for the actions.