I'm a speaker of Dutch and I was surprised to read about two tenses I had never heard about before. Convoluted verlaine tied and Voltaire coordinated tied are two tenses not only unknown to me, the names of the tenses are not even Dutch words. Nor are the examples you give. Registered was i dear should be Gisteren was ik daar and better Ik ben daar gisteren geweest.
In Dutch the Onvoltooid Verleden Tijd (O.V.T.) (~simple past) is used to express an event prior to the moment of speaking, but without emphasis on whether the event is completely over or not. It is often used with time adverbials expressing frequency or duration (all day long; when I was younger I went fishing once a week.). The Voltooid Verleden Tijd (V.V.T.) (~present perfect) is used in the same grammatical context (to express an event prior to the moment of speaking), but here the emphasis lies on the event being completed or completed and with present consequences. it is often used with time adverbials expressing a time when something happened (yesterday, ...). Note that the present perfect can't be used with time adverbials like yesterday, but the V.V.T. can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Irregular and dynamic/static
The article should mention the phenomenon of irregular verbs and should make a distinction between dynamic and static verbs when describing the different functions. Otherwise, nice overview. --Sinatra 14:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
From the article: "Simple past is used for describing acts that have already been secluded"
I'm not familiar with any meaning of "secluded" that would make sense in the above sentence. Is "secluded" a technical term, or is its use in the above sentence a mistake? --220.127.116.11 22:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, the word I wanted was "concluded". Changes have already been made. Thanks!
Even if this is English only, there are paragraphs at Imperfect tense#English and Pluperfect#Examples from various languages suggesting this may be incomplete, and even is this article is based on an "English only has two/three tenses" POV it should have pointers to other approaches. It is seriously lacking when considering past tenses in other languages. --Henrygb 18:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't know what to call this form, but what about "Used to" in English (I used to do that) This is a past tense that emphasises that it is not true in the present, and usually not true in the future also. This is a legitimate since there is no possible literal meaning to this phrase.
He would do this, he would do that
I have been editing the article on Charles Ives but certain passages of the article use a tense that I'm not sure what to call. Maybe a past progessive tense-but instead of 'was' it uses 'would' Here is a quote :
"Starting around 1910 Ives would begin composing his most accomplished works including the "Holidays Symphony" and arguably his best-known piece "Three Places in New England". Ives' mature works of this era would eventually compare with the two other great musical innovators at the time (Schoenberg and Stravinsky) making the case that Ives was the 3rd great innovator of early 20th century composition. Arnold Schoenberg himself would compose a brief poem near the end of his life honoring Ives."
I think the tense used in the Ive's article makes the article more wordy than neccesary but I am curious to know what it is as it doesn't seem to be mentioned here. Anybody know? --Godfinger 21:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- I came here to ask precisely the same sort of question. This edit was described as changing passive voice to active, but it has nothing to do with voice. It's just changing "she would play" etc to "she played". What's the "would play" version of the past tense called? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
it,s not informative