«<<Nope, they both have only one adverb indicating time: yesterday. the other phrase — "in a time span of three weeks" - which you mistook as indicating TIME, actually indicates duration.>>
So I had talked about TIME.»
Yes, mistakenly. And why the heck aren't you saying anything about this time/duration dilemma and blabber about me apeaking of style???
«Can you prove otherwise?»
Yes. Present Perfect there means I don't actually care of when I wrote the book. Only the result — the fact I've written it — is important for me, so I used Presetn Perfect. If you don't believe me, you may ask other Antimooners.
«If the writing happens before "a month ago", why don't you use PAST PERFECT?»
This is when the speaker's attitude toward the action works. And I have found a site where they admit its role and call it aspect:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/frames/contents.htm
(see section dedicated to verbs)
«Ant_222, please do believe that, in news reports, yesterday's happening will be said in Simple Past -- even it has a result or consequence up to the present time.»
Not always. For example:
«The famous artist John Cramp has died of cancer. He was 50 and had two children»
«By the way, you have repeatedly claimed that there is an answer in another web page, without explaining anything. I suggest you should not do this again, at least to me. I don't know what you want me to see.»
Oh, please! You know what I'm talking about!
http://www.proz.com/topic/39405?start=15&float=
«You have to say something, and then quote a web page to support you. If you don't know what you should quote here yourself, how can I know what you want me to see?»
What do you mean by that? I can't write my own thoughts, only copy and paste from different "web pages"?
«If as you see "SAYS"="current opinion is", what is SAID doing? Will you suggest that, in news report, the reporter uses SAID to imply it is not "current opinion" anymore?»
Of course, no! It just states the fact that he said something.
«My dear Ant_222, if I am not fast enough, someone will jump in before me to answer you. Anyone will know how I answer such question. Anyone can see your trick, or your confusion.»
What the heck? I am not confused and that's not a trick! If you have doubts/questions I'll answer them. Right below the quoted fragment I described why I had chosen this term.
«By "My answer will be the same", I mean I have already answered you:
<<"The SENTENCE expresses the meaning, and the tense expresses the TIME." -- I guess I have repeated this more than 50 times here in this thread.>>»
My question was which type of tyme that was. You answered incorrectly at the first time, then I explained why you were wrong and then you shifted the ground so that your reply has nothing to deal with the question asked.
Everytime I show your mistakes clear enough to hinder you from word speculations you ignore me.
«Look at my answer again, SENTENCE is not TIME. This is what I mean. This is my logic.»
That so simple that even a 5-year child knows that! Furthermore, it a tautology. Any two different things are different. All right. I see how advanced your logic is.
«Now look at your own words, you at first asked me about TIME, and then are switching the topic of ACTIONS, SENTENCE, and ACTION, never to mention TIME again.»
Slander.
Sentences describe actions, actions happen in time. I use all the terms.
«Why didn't you first ask me "Are they of the same ACTIONS?" Then I would answer you they are not the same ACTIONS.»
What I asked was whether those actions were of the same time. And you turned it into a grammatically incorrect delirium.
«Tense is used to express time. I have claimed it before. I thought it was true when you said loudly:
<<Subconsciously? I agree with that knowingly!>>»
That's true.
«TIME is to judge, and ACTION is to be judged. How can they be the same? Is a policeman taking a thief to the police station, or the thief taking the policeman to the police station? Who knows? But I think there must be some difference between two terms.»
Time is a property of the action which, in turn, is part of the sentence. Now you write nonsence and screw it all up. Why?
Again, you are making all efforts to misinterpret my words instead of trying hard to understanbd them.
P.S.: I won't be even sligtly amazed is this thread is suddenly closed or removed. It gets very unpleasant for me to post here.
So I had talked about TIME.»
Yes, mistakenly. And why the heck aren't you saying anything about this time/duration dilemma and blabber about me apeaking of style???
«Can you prove otherwise?»
Yes. Present Perfect there means I don't actually care of when I wrote the book. Only the result — the fact I've written it — is important for me, so I used Presetn Perfect. If you don't believe me, you may ask other Antimooners.
«If the writing happens before "a month ago", why don't you use PAST PERFECT?»
This is when the speaker's attitude toward the action works. And I have found a site where they admit its role and call it aspect:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/internet-grammar/frames/contents.htm
(see section dedicated to verbs)
«Ant_222, please do believe that, in news reports, yesterday's happening will be said in Simple Past -- even it has a result or consequence up to the present time.»
Not always. For example:
«The famous artist John Cramp has died of cancer. He was 50 and had two children»
«By the way, you have repeatedly claimed that there is an answer in another web page, without explaining anything. I suggest you should not do this again, at least to me. I don't know what you want me to see.»
Oh, please! You know what I'm talking about!
http://www.proz.com/topic/39405?start=15&float=
«You have to say something, and then quote a web page to support you. If you don't know what you should quote here yourself, how can I know what you want me to see?»
What do you mean by that? I can't write my own thoughts, only copy and paste from different "web pages"?
«If as you see "SAYS"="current opinion is", what is SAID doing? Will you suggest that, in news report, the reporter uses SAID to imply it is not "current opinion" anymore?»
Of course, no! It just states the fact that he said something.
«My dear Ant_222, if I am not fast enough, someone will jump in before me to answer you. Anyone will know how I answer such question. Anyone can see your trick, or your confusion.»
What the heck? I am not confused and that's not a trick! If you have doubts/questions I'll answer them. Right below the quoted fragment I described why I had chosen this term.
«By "My answer will be the same", I mean I have already answered you:
<<"The SENTENCE expresses the meaning, and the tense expresses the TIME." -- I guess I have repeated this more than 50 times here in this thread.>>»
My question was which type of tyme that was. You answered incorrectly at the first time, then I explained why you were wrong and then you shifted the ground so that your reply has nothing to deal with the question asked.
Everytime I show your mistakes clear enough to hinder you from word speculations you ignore me.
«Look at my answer again, SENTENCE is not TIME. This is what I mean. This is my logic.»
That so simple that even a 5-year child knows that! Furthermore, it a tautology. Any two different things are different. All right. I see how advanced your logic is.
«Now look at your own words, you at first asked me about TIME, and then are switching the topic of ACTIONS, SENTENCE, and ACTION, never to mention TIME again.»
Slander.
Sentences describe actions, actions happen in time. I use all the terms.
«Why didn't you first ask me "Are they of the same ACTIONS?" Then I would answer you they are not the same ACTIONS.»
What I asked was whether those actions were of the same time. And you turned it into a grammatically incorrect delirium.
«Tense is used to express time. I have claimed it before. I thought it was true when you said loudly:
<<Subconsciously? I agree with that knowingly!>>»
That's true.
«TIME is to judge, and ACTION is to be judged. How can they be the same? Is a policeman taking a thief to the police station, or the thief taking the policeman to the police station? Who knows? But I think there must be some difference between two terms.»
Time is a property of the action which, in turn, is part of the sentence. Now you write nonsence and screw it all up. Why?
Again, you are making all efforts to misinterpret my words instead of trying hard to understanbd them.
P.S.: I won't be even sligtly amazed is this thread is suddenly closed or removed. It gets very unpleasant for me to post here.