you stress(ed) normally

Forums: Grammar, English
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Teacher: NORMALLY, students can't switch to other classes.
Student: You stress(ed) NORMALLY, does it mean there are abnormal situations?

If I were the student, should I say STRESS or STRESSED?

The event has happened recently, so I think the past tense is not that justified. But I am not sure....

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 662 • Replies: 11

No top replies

Not knowing how much emphasis was placed on the word, it's hard to tell exactly what he/she meant.

I would guess that your teacher was intimating that certain extenuating circumstances may allow a switch, but that being allowed to switch was a rare occurence.

If your teacher has already said it, then technically it becomes past tense.

1 Reply

@Lordyaswas,

Thank you.

But can emphasis affect the tense? (it's novel

1 Reply

@WBYeats,

The only way that I can see you would use stress, is if it's relating to the teacher's general views.

You stress that individual thought is important in your class. Which is what led to me taking this risk in my paper.

Though you could also try this to keep it in the present tense.

You're stressing the normally, does this imply there is an abnormal case?

Though this would probably only really fit if the teacher had done it several times in short succession.

But if you are refering to a specific thing she said, it becomes past tense. At least in English, it doesn't have any distinctions between near past and past.

0 Replies

@WBYeats,

Quote:

Teacher: NORMALLY, students can't switch to other classes.
Student: You stress(ed) NORMALLY, does it mean there are abnormal situations?

If I were the student, should I say STRESS or STRESSED?

The event has happened recently, so I think the past tense is not that justified. But I am not sure....

You could use either. 'ed' is a more neutral way to simply describe the past event, ie. saying 'stressed'. Using 'stress' in a situation like this is often used as an way tom introduce further discussion, as the student has done in this case.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Thanks all.

Is your 'introduce discussion' reason able for account for the use of SAY like this?

"He was running, —running desperately, running for his life, running until he burst his heart and fell dead upon his face."

"Running from what?"

"There lies our problem. There are indications that the man was crazed with fear before ever he began to run."

"How can you say that?"

When a man utters 'how can you say that', the THAT must be something past, then why not SAID?

1 Reply

@WBYeats,

Quote:

Is your 'introduce discussion' reason able for account for the use of SAY like this?

"He was running, —running desperately, running for his life, running until he burst his heart and fell dead upon his face."

"Running from what?"

"There lies our problem. There are indications that the man was crazed with fear before ever he began to run."

"How can you say that?"

When a man utters 'how can you say that', the THAT must be something past, then why not SAID?

What was spoken is in the past, but that doesn't mean that English demands that we native speakers use only 'said'. In the situation you've laid out here, WB, using 'said' is impossible --> *How can you said that?

[* denotes ungrammatical]

1 Reply

@JTT,

Oh... I must also admit today I don't feel quite well and when I look at my posts I don't understand why I made such a mistake. Sorry~

To put my question right:

THAT must be in the past, then why doesn't that person say:

'How COULD you say that?'

COULD here is the usual past form of CAN; in modern English, to refer to the present, we can use CAN/COULD; to the past, only COULD is possible, when the meaning is ABLE/IN A POSITION TO DO STH; in that conversation, the speaker is referring to a particular thing said in the PAST, so I am not able to use grammar to explain it, though I think it's natural....

1 Reply

@WBYeats,

"He was running, —running desperately, running for his life, running until he burst his heart and fell dead upon his face."

"Running from what?"

"There lies our problem. There are indications that the man was crazed with fear before ever he began to run."

"How can you say that?" // 'How COULD you say that?'

====================

Quote:

COULD here is the usual past form of CAN;

I'm afraid that this isn't true, WB. COULD is not the past form of CAN. Modal verbs have no tense. Modal verbs carry individual emotive feelings into sentences and tense is indicated by other means.

Neither of the examples above, in your dialogue [I put them in red] refer to past time. CAN and COULD carry emotive meaning. they do not indicate tense. If that speaker wanted to discuss something that was said at some time in the past, the change would look like this, red for now, blue for the past.

"How can you say that?" // "How COULD you say that?"

"How can you have said that?" // "How COULD you have said that?"

Quote:

in modern English, to refer to the present, we can use CAN/COULD; to the past, only COULD is possible, when the meaning is ABLE/IN A POSITION TO DO STH; in that conversation, the speaker is referring to a particular thing said in the PAST, so I am not able to use grammar to explain it, though I think it's natural....

We don't need grammar to explain this at all, WB. We only need look at how native English speakers use modal verbs.

My apologies for the long website links. I forget how to do the short version.

Google Exact Phrase Search - English only
"How can you have said "
About 791,000,000 results

http://www.google.ca/search?as_q=&as_epq=%22How+could+you+have+said+%22&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=lang_en&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=#lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&tbs=lr:lang_1en&q=%22How+can+you+have+said+%22&oq=%22How+can+you+have+said+%22&gs_l=serp.12...4408.7229.0.9979.6.6.0.0.0.0.438.1795.2-4j1j1.6.0...0.0...1c.1.14.serp.tN8BH2dLuCA&bav=on.2,or.&bvm=bv.46865395,d.cGE&fp=c05a1f3e236fad6&biw=1366&bih=643

=======================
Google Exact Phrase Search - English only
"How could you have said "
About 11,800,000 results

http://www.google.ca/search?as_q=&as_epq=%22How+could+you+have+said+%22&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=lang_en&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=

1 Reply

@JTT,

Thank you~

I need to think it over....

1 Reply

@WBYeats,

If you believe, WB, that I am mistaken on this issue that modal verbs are tenseless, please do not hesitate to call me on it, to ask pointed questions, to drill me.

Rest assured that I will not respond to you with anger or rude comments.

I can understand how you must feel having been told that COULD is the past tense of CAN, WOULD of WILL, MIGHT of MAY, SHOULD of SHALL. Check virtually every dictionary and you'll find that they contradict what I'm saying.

Here, I'll even give you some examples.

Quote:

AHD

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/could

could (kd) KEY

aux.v.
Past tense of can1
Used to indicate ability or permission in the past: I could run faster then. Only men could go to the club in those days.
Used with hypothetical or conditional force: If we could help, we would.
Used to indicate tentativeness or politeness: I could be wrong. Could you come over here?

Quote:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/could

Could
past of can
—used in auxiliary function in the past <we found we could go>, in the past conditional <we said we would go if we could>, and as an alternative to can suggesting less force or certainty or as a polite form in the present <if you could come we would be pleased>

Despite what the dictionaries say, after many long years of asking, no English native speaker, [or ESL] has been able to provide an example illustrating that modal verbs have tense.

1 Reply

@JTT,

In fact, yes, I can find many dictionaries saying COULD can be the past tense of CAN, and I really admire your ability to say something different from these traditional explanations.

I have to admit that language is language - something that can't be satisfactorily reduced to rules, and very often controversy arises. Your explanation is brilliant, and I have seen explanations like this only in some university teachers' magnum opus like Mr Roger Berry.

Back to the original questions, you say CAN and COULD in a situation such as is described in that Sherlockian story are used to refer to the same time; and the usual answer to questions like 'what's the difference between CAN and COULD' is that they differ in politeness. Does this politeness theory apply to that Sherlockian example?

0 Replies

you stress(ed) normally

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know