LANGUAGE MAPPING SUMMARY

The grammar course refers to the notion of the human language faculty, not the Language Acquisition Device. Our devices are strictly linguistic and symbolic implements.

Everyone has one PRESENT, PAST, or FUTURE really. Three fields or extents can symbolize this reality, for the grammatical time (CHAPTER 1).

In the Fields of Time, we observe on the verb form “will” mapping on the FUTURE already in the PRESENT grammatical form (CHAPTER 2).

We perceive and extract three Aspect patterns,
in CHAPTER 3 and SUBCHAPTER 3.1.

We symbolize the first element in the Simple pattern with the Greek lemniscate, that is, the INDETERMINATE OR INFINITY: it can be any verb.

We associate grammar and human natural mapping, as with geography and travel, in CHAPTER 4.

We people live on Earth. We usually view lands or waters as extents. We give at least psychological borders to areas in which we are. We perceive routes and ways to places. We happen to be at landmarks and places.

Such are human natural variables for space, in English. We can use them for the grammatical Aspect.

Arrows are very familiar symbols to show or indicate the way. We combine our mapping and arrow symbols, to exercise our target grammatical time, in CHAPTER 5.

The ability will be vital with Modal verbs. Their forms may not tell directly what time the talk is about.

We make a color palette, and combine language components for the Affirmative, Negative, or Interrogative (SUB-CHAPTER 5.1).

To expand our syntax, we learn to keep the head time (CHAPTER 6). We use time frames. We keep the real-time frame open for the Perfect, and we close it for the Simple or Progressive: Perfect tenses can make more than one reference in real time.

All along, we mind we use concepts, inventions, and symbols. We do not claim there is anything like time frames or time extents in human heads.

Common sense, if we can make a wheel, it does not mean we have wheels in our heads.

We compare our mapping variables {ON} and {IN} in CHAPTER 7. In classic terms, we compare the Simple and the Progressive, for the stative use of verbs as to love, to hate, to think.

We merge our mapping variables {IN} and {TO} for the Perfect Progressive, in CHAPTER 8.

We get a mapping variable {AT}, to manage all Aspects as we want.

We do not change language. The following examples come from the Corpus of Contemporary American English, COCA:
This is a dream come true. And I’m loving every minute of it.
I’ve been loving it. But I want to keep doing different things.

We consider the variable {ON} for an earthling basic variable in SUB-CHAPTER 8.1. Astronauts also have learned language on Earth.

Modal verbs challenge us on the target time in CHAPTER 9.

We make relative time frames for Modal forms, and learn to keep the earthling basic variable, in SUBCHAPTER 10.1.

But the obstacles, she would have made progress.
(She did not make or has not made progress.)

*****

Despite the obstacles, she would have made progress.
(She has made progress.)

Feel welcome.

10.4. MORE WORKOUT FOR REAL-TIME TALK

Exercise 64. The word “if” does not belong with Form Relativity only. We can change “if” for “whether”, when we talk about circumstances or results rather than provisions or causes.

We have the “if” we can change underlined, in the exercise.

To practice spoken comprehension, we can use abbreviated auxiliaries, reorder phrases, as well as use Inversion, for style and flexibility.

Example 1:
She did not know if she was right.

Answer:
She did not know whether she was right.

Example 2:
If he hadn’t been extremely busy,
he would’ve remembered about the coffee.

Answer:
Hadn’t he been extremely busy,
he would’ve remembered about the coffee.

Alternately:
Had he not been extremely busy,
he would have remembered about the coffee.

*****
TASK

1. If she weren’t reading the calligraphic,
she’d be sleeping.

2. If he was writing, reading, or talking,
the colloquium had him busy all the time.

3. If he hadn’t heard from Bill then,
he’d be writing him a letter now.

4. If it weren’t such a good quality,
she’d think it a mere prank.

5. If it sustains the quality throughout,
it’ll compare with the Bodleian Horace.

6. They will / can see in the library,
if they get the Medici print.

7. If it weren’t so conscientious,
he’d throw it in that Babbitt’s garden next door.

8. If it proves necessary,
she’ll have it carbon dated.

9. If it is as good as it looks,
it might be of worth even as just a calligraphic.

10. If it hadn’t been deprived of the front matter,
it would be easier to find out who made it.

Further journey brings the Causative and the Passive, our “have it carbon dated”, in example 8, and “had been deprived”, in example 10.

Exercise 65. We can use the word “if” also in the sense of the word “when”. Grammatically, it is up to our choosing, if we speak the premise or the result first.

The exercise is not grammatically difficult. Let us think how we could say it, as in EXERCISE 33 and EXERCISE 34.

Example:
IF you provision in the condition,
may stipulation precede in position.

Answer:
May stipulation precede in position,
WHEN you provision in the condition.

*****
TASK

1. You’ll make your adage suit,
IF you toot the root in the foot.

(We can look up word stress patterns in dictionaries).

2. IF the comma won’t curse or ban,
a dot might bid the span.

3. IF the verb does not adjust,
the pronoun must never entrust.

4. IF a Modal will emend,
may diction recommend a robust complement.

5. IF meanings collate and debate,
may syntax negotiate.

Exercise 66. It is most often up to ourselves to decide, if we use Form Relativity. Let us practice the choosing. The arrow cues show the target grammatical time.

As in EXERCISE 43 and EXERCISE 58, we practice holding on to our grammatical thinking even against unusual wording.

Our inspiration is a fairy tale by Hans Christian Andersen,
“THE LITTLE TINY OR THUMBELINA”.
Let us think the exercise over, as in MIND PRACTICE.

Example:
If there 1. (be) other Little Tinies, the Little Tiny 2. (can be) one of many similar beings.

Answer, with Form Relativity:
If there were other Little Tinies, the Little Tiny could be one of many similar beings.

Alternate, without Form Relativity:
If there are other Little Tinies, the Little Tiny is / can be one of many similar beings.

A. “If I 3. (be) only one of many Little Tinies, I 4. (be) actually a Little Tiny”, the Tiny hypothesized.

B. She 5. (be) strictly an inch tall and she 6. (want) a measure for her dreams.

C. “A cubit 7. (be) the length of your forearm right to the tip of your middle finger”, she 8. (reckon).

D. However, a cubit 9. (be) factually about 17.5 inches.

E. “If you 10. (have to think) about an inch to think about a cubit”, she went on hypothesizing, “my cubit N 11. (can be) a cubit, as I 12. (be) just an inch tall.

G. She 13. (visualize) a cube. “If you really 14. (need to consider) measures, you 15. (figure) on a cube of a dream”, she made another theory.

H. Nothing was positively two-dimensional. “Even if you 16. (reason) on your forearm simply, you 17. (will make) it out for three-dimensional”, she 18. (speculate).

I. “If nothing 19. (be) truly two-dimensional, dreams 20. (be) non-two-dimensional, too.”

J. “You 21. (can have) a cube of a dream, if you 22. (want) to tell whether your dreams are big or small?”

K. She 23. (start) to entertain the theory. Once you 24. (agree) to a measure, you 25. (can add up) cubes with dreams like with anything else.

L. Well, but a Thumbelina 26. (can have) a cube of a dream, if cubes 27. (be) cubits big, too? The Tiny 28. (sigh) with uncertainty.

Exercise 67. Let us be back with the grain of sand. The word “if” is not the only word to help make hypotheses. Let us try the words “as” and “when”.

They can work as conjunctions. “As” would agree with the premise. “When” would allow an opposite sense. We can know the study of meaning as semantics.

Example:
“If I N (be) a grain of sand, I (be) more prone to be of a like mind with a westerly wind”, the grain of sand thought.

Answer:
“If I were not a grain of sand, I would be more prone to be of a like mind with a westerly wind”, the grain of sand thought.

Task B gives the NODUS for the exercise. We put the thought in quotes in the grammatical PRESENT. All other phrasing is in the time of the nodus, or relative to the time of the nodus.

The exercise can help us prepare for further journey: the Reported Speech and other linguistic challenges.

A. “If wits N (be) a real thing, you (can evade) the matter of their shape”, the grain of sand (deliberate).

B. The grain of sand did eight hours of thinking about composite things a day.
NODUS

C. As the eight hours N (be) immaterial, the faculty the grain of sand (employ) during the time N (can be) immaterial either, it (conclude).

D. Obviously, the faculty you (use) to ponder on composite things (have to be) the reasoning faculty.

E. Wits, whatever their quality, (have to be) of a shape, the grain of sand (feel).

F. Therefore, it (be) uncanny for a grain of sand and a wind to be of the same mind.

G. “A thought (can be) genuinely the same, when the wits (be) not?”

H. Possibly, asking the wind its opinion N (can decide) on the issue, the grain of sand (analyze).

I. Alternately, the phrase “the same thought” (may become) just a way to speak about potentially very dissimilar things.

J. Still, the phrase “the same thought” truly (exist) and (have) its real shape. “What (happen), if you (translate) it to another language?”

K. The grain of sand (wonder) for five minutes. The phrase sure (may change) in its look.

L. Then, the term “shape” N (will be) as easy to comprehend.

M. “The same thought (will render) the same shape of mind if you (give) it the look of another language?”

N. The grain of sand (immerse) in thought for another five minutes.

Exercise 68. We can join Jim Colderstone in winter Alaska. Alaska has the largest population of bald eagles in the USA. We can mark Modality with the letter M.

We do not have to use a Modal everywhere the letter M is. We can use more than one Modal where the letter M is, or is not, too. The symbol is just to encourage Modality.

We are in the grammatical PRESENT, and we include Expression, but the exercise is open-ended: no one can or may prescribe on a natural language.

When Jim ran into the office (CHAPTER 6), Jill was not there. She left him a note, before going on her Paris vacation.

We cannot demand insight into private correspondence. The exercise only renders the message, in a mystified way. We can try to guess what Jill might have written, after a minor discord.

Example: You M N 1. (have) the ambition to be the colder stone, if you M 2. (be) in winter Alaska yourself.

Answer: You would not have the ambition to be the colder stone if you could be in the winter Alaska yourself.

A. It M 3. (be) enough that you 4. (go) EPIC terrestrial and you M 5. (see) that the temperatures 6. (favor) a Colderstone for the role.

(We can go epic.noaa.gov/epic, if we want to go EPIC terrestrial ourselves.)

B. Although you M N 7. (go) to Alaska to do STEM paperwork only, you M 8. (like) the ridges of new green and the cool breeze in a shiny spring Alaskan morning.

(We can go nsf.gov for STEM programs.)

C. Space and time M 9. (become) a source of perplexity, if you 10. (think) about times outside the present.

D. Well, humans M N 11. (be) logic strictly. And temperature, for the senses to come together well, M N 12. (be) the source for all feeling.

E. If they N 13. (have) a place in a human discourse, words M N 14. (tell) anything exact. The place yet 15. (be) only hypothetical. This 16. (be) the human person to make language possible.

Let us take our story to the grammatical PAST.

Answer:
Naturally, you would not have the ambition to be the colder stone, if you could be in winter Alaska yourself.
AN OPEN MODAL FRAME IN THE PAST

Alternate:

Naturally, you would not have had the ambition to be the colder stone, if you could have been in the winter Alaska yourself.
A MODAL FRAME CLOSED ON THE PAST

The alternate can “anchor” our discourse. The time-anchored alternate would tell about “there, then, that time, that winter: THE Alaska as we got to know it on the occasion, in the circumstance”.

*****

FROM THE KEY: Grammar resources vary so vastly in guidance on Modal verbs and the Conditional or Unreal Past that we may feel we need a comparison on language forms.

When we work out own, independent perspectives, we become able to use our language logic consistently.

It is enough we are consistent. We do not have to follow any particular resource, to be correct.

A.
MODAL MEDIATION in the PRESENT
It may / can be enough that you go EPIC terrestrial and you may / can see that the temperatures would favor a Colderstone for the role.

FORM RELATIVITY in the PRESENT
It could / might / would be enough that you went EPIC terrestrial and you might / would see that the temperatures might / would favor a Colderstone for the role.

2ND CONDITIONAL REFERENCE
If you went EPIC terrestrial, you would / might see that the temperatures might / would favor a Colderstone for the role.

NO MODAL MEDIATION or FORM RELATIVITY in the PRESENT
It is enough that you go EPIC terrestrial and you see that the temperatures favor a Colderstone for the role.

ZERO CONDITIONAL REFERENCE
If / When / As you go EPIC terrestrial, you see that the temperatures favor a Colderstone for the role.

*****

Feel welcome to continue with the language story in Part Three (!)

Part Three can bring
Jill’s library in plain canvas ― the speech part and the determiner manner and matter;
Chantelle’s travel to the Book Cliffs ― verbal nouns and other ways of syntax to the notional time;
Reported speech, the Passive, and many more components of our language landscape.

10.3. WORKOUT FOR REAL-TIME TALK

Envisioning language study as travel in a dimension, we could think about our skill as guarding us against steep slopes. Let us warm up, for some workout.

Exercise 60. We do the exercise in our thoughts, as in the MIND PRACTICE. The arrow cues show the target grammatical time. We regard our linguistic Form Relativity.

Example: If you learned, you knew.
The forms “learned” and “knew” together show there is no linguistic relativity here. Our target grammatical time is the FUTURE.

Answer: If you WILL learn, you WILL know.

1. If you learn, you know.

2. If you WERE ABLE TO learn, you WERE ABLE TO know.

3. If you learned, you WOULD know.

4. If you HAD learned, you WOULD have known.

5. If you learn, you WILL know.

6. If you learned, you WOULD know.

7. If you HAD learned, you WOULD have known.

8. If you learn, you WILL know.

Exercise 61. Let us try “jumping” time extents, as in EXERCISE 55. We provide the arrow cues for the target grammatical time. Our “jumping” symbols are:

“One time extent forward”;

“One time extent backward”.

We can present the flow of time as on a symbolic line.

We can place the question mark, for the Interrogative Expression.

Example: If you learned {?}, you knew.

Answer: DO you learn, if you know?

Example: If you learned, you knew {?}

Answer: If you learn, DO you know?

We can place the letter N for our Negative Expression.

Example: If you learned {N}, you knew.

Answer: If you DON’T learn, you know.

Example: If you learned {N}, you knew {N}.

Answer: If you DON’T learn, you DON’T know.

Example: If you learned, you knew {N}.

Answer: If you learn, you DON’T know.

*****
TASK

1. If you learned, you knew {?}

2. If you learn {N}, you know.

3. If you learned, you WOULD know {?}

4. If you HAD learned, you WOULD HAVE known {N}.

5. If you learn, you WILL know {N}.

6. If you learned, you WOULD know {N}.

7. If you HAD learned, you WOULD HAVE known {?}

8. If you learn, you WILL know {?}

9. If you learned {N}, you WOULD know.

10. If you HAD learned {N}, you WOULD HAVE known {?}

Exercise 62. We can be back with someone we met in EXERCISE 37. Ms. Seges appeared already in Part One of our grammar course.

We were learning about personal pronouns, then (CHAPTER 1). Now we may think about our time frames, real-time and Modal. We can think about time frames also when the story is fictional.

It is weekend, late morning. Mr. Seges ― he never appeared in our grammar story before ― returns from a literary meeting.

Example: Ms. Seges is home, in her study. Though she had worked most of the night on her new book, she would be analyzing some old papers, now.

Answer: Ms. Seges is home.

Though she had worked most of the night on her new book,

she would be analyzing some old papers, now.

We can view Modal structures as modified real-time phrases
(SUB-CHAPTER 10.1).
Here, the phrase is not about a theory.
In our story, Ms. Seges is in her study, analyzing some old papers.

Let us compare a theory:
There is something very interesting about the old papers.
Otherwise, she would be sleeping.

*****

TASK

1. MR. SEGES: Honey, I’m back. What are you doing?

2. MS. SEGES: I’d be reading horoscopes.
(Ms. Seges never reads horoscopes.)

3. That is…?
(Mr. Seges does not believe she would ever read horoscopes.)

4. This looks like a calligraphic copy of Vespucci’s letters. It was slipping out of our backyard hedge, no covers or front matter.

5. “Hadn’t it sure taken a lot to make such a book, I’d suspect that Babbitt next door.

6. You remember, Bill wrote the book I was looking for was as likely to be obtained as a calligraphic of Vespucci’s originals.

7. And it was the title the Babbitt gave me. It was completely a fairy-tale, Bill even checked with the Freeman’s.”

8. About legends, my favorite Chicago blend is…

9. Honey, I would have remembered about the coffee; but I was so preoccupied…

10. I’m putting that with my records. The coffee is not a fairy-tale. It continues to exist somewhere in Chicago.

*****

From the key: Let us remember about text rich interpretation, as in EXERCISE 55. Babbitt is a character by Sinclair Lewis, an American writer. The Freeman’s is a famous auction house to specialize also in books.

Amerigo Vespucci described his voyages in letters to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de Medici. Calligraphic copies were still quite a habit for most important documents, in Vespucci’s times.

*****

Skimming can encourage effective learning; feel welcome to have a peek into EXERCISE 64, before doing this one.

Exercise 63. Let us focus on Form Relativity with the Progressive. We remember about the earthling proper egoism (please compare SUB-CHAPTER 8.1).

We have the value {IN} next to the verb to go with the Progressive. However, we can stay {ON} our cognitive grounds for qualities, hearts and minds (CHAPTER 7).

Example: {PAST}, he, N 1. (be) extremely busy, 2. (remember) {IN} to bring that brand coffee.

Answer: If he had not been extremely busy, he would have remembered to bring that brand coffee.

Our symbolics:
A CLOSED MODAL FRAME, AND GRAMMATICAL TARGET PAST.

Please think if to use FORM RELATIVITY in example 2. A non-relative form will show a number of activities different from the relative. We can use Modals other than WILL, too.

*****

1. {PRESENT}, she, N read {IN} the calligraphic, she, sleep {IN}.
(She worked on her new book all night.)

2. {PAST}, he, N write {IN}, he, read or talk {IN}.
(The colloquium was very engaging.)

3. {PAST}, he, N hear {IN} from Bill then, {PRESENT}, he, write {IN} him a letter now.

4. {PRESENT}, it, N be {IN} such a good quality, she, think it a mere prank.

5. {FUTURE}, it, N sustain {IN} the quality throughout, it, compare {IN} with the Bodleian Horace and Francis Crease talent.

6. {FUTURE}, they, look in the library, they, get the Medici print.
(Someone most probably made it from the Medici print.)

7. {PRESENT}, it, N be so conscientious, he, throw it in that Babbitt’s garden next door.

8. {FUTURE}, it, prove necessary, she, have it carbon dated.

9. {PRESENT}, it, be as good as it looks, it, M be of worth even as just a calligraphic.

10. {PAST} it, N deprive of the front matter, {PRESENT}, it, be {IN} easier to find out who made it.

Feel welcome to some more exercise. We are gradually getting independent of cues. Real-time, we people speak without them.
10.4. MORE WORKOUT FOR REAL-TIME TALK

*****

10.1. THE UNREAL PAST OR CONDITIONAL: REAL TIME

Let us try a few more quotes.

More than that, and breaking precedent once more, I do not intend to commence any sentence with these words ― “If George Washington had been alive today”, or “If Thomas Jefferson”, or “If Alexander Hamilton”, or “If Abraham Lincoln had been alive today…”
Theodore Roosevelt, American President

PRESIDENT THEODORE ROOSEVELT

Grammar resources might label the quote from Theodore Roosevelt as the 3rd Conditional, Unreal Past, or even the Past Unreal Conditional, dependent on the grammar approach solely.

Some of those resources would tell we build the 3rd Conditional of the Past Perfect and the Future in the Past.

We would have to recognize the Past Perfect for a potentially Unreal form, then.

Worse still, our “Unreal Past Perfect” would be as good as merely a fancy. Please compare a quote from Gerald Ford.

If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be turning over in his grave.

PRESIDENT GERALD FORD.

It is not only for our pension plans that we might be unwilling to have the Past Perfect for merely a fancy.

With Perfect tenses overall, our syntactic HAVE helps tell about real time. It has an open, real-time frame. To compare physical space, we might think about paths or routes on real ground.

{TO} is our cognitive variable.
We have the variable to render duration and time spans.

With the Unreal grammatical time or Conditional, HAVE brings hypothetical time. It is not part the real map, then.

It comes with an auxiliary compass for relative time, and closes the frame for the theory. We attach the auxiliary compass to the Modal.

Our cognitive variable is {ON}.

Duration and time span become generalized.
We have called it our Modal Net.

Whether our verb would be to read, to speak, to run, to stop, or to jump, duration becomes non-essential, with a theory closed frame.

The matter is exactly the same with the anchor HAVE in Theodore Roosevelt’s quote. The phrase, “had been alive”, is not concerned with longevity or shortness of life.

The phrase narrates about being alive generally, and we could quote Gerald Ford’s wording, “were alive” for an exact paraphrase.

Naturally, we might note that live people would not be likely staying in their graves, but our thing here is to work grammar for language uses as they are, even if absolutely abstract or humorous.

We may recur to CHAPTER 10. Our example was
“If you HAD eaten the cookie, you WOULD NOT HAVE had it (at some later, but still PAST time)”.

Again, the anchor HAVE pays no heed to the length of time it takes to eat a cookie. It helps mind if the cookie remains, or has been consumed in the course of events.

The syntactic role is narrative, not factual.
We may compare SUB-CHAPTER 9.2.
I thought the handle MIGHT HAVE / COULD HAVE broken off.
(It turned out it was still in place.)

However we know the theory was against fact, we can tell our story with the anchor HAVE.

About stories and their telling, the Conditional or grammatical “unreal time” are often backtrack logic: we look to the consequent, to speculate on the premise.

Let us think if language might transfer features.

We can view the phrase had eaten as a transfer of the syntactic anchor from the consequent.

We may think about a similar transfer for the Passive, where the object becomes the subject and the predicate adapts.

We do not need to view the anchor HAVE as the real-time Past Perfect. For speculation as “had been alive” or “were alive”, the choice is purely stylistic.

Let us try another president quote.

*****

“If I had permitted my failures, or what seemed to me at the time a lack of success, to discourage me, I cannot see any way in which I would ever have made progress.”
Calvin Coolidge, American President

CALVIN COOLIDGE IN 1910, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Grammar resources might label the above as the 2nd Conditional, or view the phrase “I WOULD have made progress” as a Modal modification of a real-time “I HAVE made progress”.

The argument might be, the words definitely refer to a time span, between some time PAST and PRESENT, in which progress has been made.

Let us consider two views to our syntactic structures. We began building our language structures joining the grammatical Person, Time, and Aspect.

Modal verbs have brought form relativity and auxiliary grammatical time. Let us picture these language components.

Let us think where the verb TO HAVE might occur, as an auxiliary or head verb.

For the auxiliary time, we may compare SUB-CHAPTER 9.1.
Modality is not indispensable:
We can have auxiliary time without it, too.
I am happy to have exercised;
I was happy to have exercised;
I will be happy to have exercised.

Let us change the verb “to exercise” into the verb phrase “to make progress”.
I am happy to have made progress;
I was happy to have made progress;
I will be happy to have made progress.

Let us modify our infinitive with the Modal form MAY.
I am happy I may have made progress;
I was happy I might have made progress.
I will be happy I may have made progress.

We can view phrases as modified, as well. Our view is likely to depend on the context and word sense, namely, if a phrase looks a theory, or not.

The progress in Calvin Coolidge quote is not a theory.
I cannot see any way in which I would HAVE made progress.

Our symbolics is to help comprehend.
For Calvin Coolidge quote, we can use
MODAL MEDIATION, REAL-TIME OPEN FRAME.

For a theory, we may compare,
But the obstacles, she WOULD HAVE made progress.
But she has not made any progress.
The symbolics to help see the difference can be
A CLOSED MODAL FRAME.

*****

Let us think how the Modal frame closes. With our modified infinitive above, Modality is attached as a subordinate clause. It does not make the main grammatical time.

Let us compare Modality for our main or head, real time.

If someone asked,
“What HAS she BEEN doing?”
An answer as,
“She MAY HAVE BEEN working”,
would close the hypothetical time on the grammatical and real-time PRESENT, just as the question.

Saying, “She MAY HAVE finished by tomorrow”, or “She WILL HAVE finished by tomorrow”, we would close our hypothetical time on tomorrow.

We can use our auxiliary time extent with all grammatical time, but we need to mind the form of the Modal verb alone, for the main time.

PRESENT Modal forms tend towards the grammatical PRESENT or FUTURE.

If we say we CAN or MAY work, the hypothesis goes into the FUTURE a little. Our Modal frame remains open.

Modal shapes we class as PAST tend towards the PAST or PRESENT. It is only with the open frame that we can use PAST Modal forms for the grammatical FUTURE.

We might say,
“We COULD do this tomorrow,”
but without auxiliary HAVE.

For our main time, we would not produce forms as
*She COULD HAVE / MIGHT HAVE finished by tomorrow.

The only exception would be the Modal WILL itself, but it is our regular mapping word for the FUTURE.
She WOULD HAVE finished by tomorrow.

The form “CAN” is quite special. We use it to tell what we are really able to do; we have the skill, or even mastery and finesse. Many grammar resources discourage closing the frame on it in the Affirmative, whatever the grammatical time.

If we are tentative about a future result, we can say
“Maybe it WILL HAVE ended by tomorrow”.
We may view the structure as the real-time Future Perfect, with an open real-time frame.

*****

Language is not a record or chronicle. It does not require absolute certainty about things coming true, or confirmation in events, for the thought to be real and for the structure to be grammatical.

*****

Do we need to resolve between labels as “Unreal Past” or “Conditional”? Let us mark individual verbs for grammatical form, in these words by Franklin Delano Roosevelt:

“No group and no Government CAN (FORM: PRESENT) properly prescribe precisely what SHOULD (FORM: PAST) constitute the body of knowledge with which true education is (FORM: PRESENT) concerned.”

It is obvious there must be a relative interpretation for grammatical from, and the extent for this relativity embraces the verb phrase.

A verb phrase can be one verb, or a verb structure, as with auxiliary HAVE.

Classing entire stretches of language as Conditional or Unreal Past, we might feel lost for the main time. We can stay by terms as “a relative verb form”, or “verb form relativity”.

Verb forms would be relative to the main grammatical time, the reference we make for the real time.

*****

Well, we may have worked out some logic. If we were lazy, we would have been doing something else for the past hour.

For a competent insight into our syntax, let us consider the Progressive. Feel welcome.
10.2. FORM RELATIVITY: THE PROGRESSIVE

*****

CHAPTER 10. FORM RELATIVITY GALORE

With Modal verbs and patterns as the Conditional or Unreal Past, we may feel about language form more as a reflection.

Let us see if we could apply our MODAL TIME FRAME to guidance on the Unreal Past or the Conditional.

*****

There has been much dispute over the Conditional. Some grammarians reject it altogether.

Let us remember that labeling does not change the objective language reality. It cannot decide on how linguistic forms may work within human discourse.

*****

Let us use Conditional patterns, to compare language forms. We mind our target grammatical time, the PRESENT, PAST, or FUTURE.

We can practice with the verb TO HAVE. It can mean keeping, tolerating, or eating something.

As a syntactic verb, HAVE may provide the auxiliary time for Modal verbs. Let us look to the syntax and negotiation of meaning: how do we eat a cookie and have it?

Our cookie is perfectly digestible. To choose on the word sense, we can underline the “HAVE” to mean keeping, tolerating, or eating.

We look to the premise (if you eat the cookie) and the consequent (you do not have it).

In PRACTICE 9.4. we viewed time as on a symbolic line.

ZERO CONDITIONAL

TARGET GRAMMATICAL TIME: THE PRESENT

83. If you eat the cookie, you DO NOT have it.

LANGUAGE FORM: PRESENT

If you eat {PRESENT}, you DO {PRESENT} NOT have

*****

1ST CONDITIONAL

TARGET GRAMMATICAL TIME: THE FUTURE

84. If you eat the cookie, you WILL NOT have it.

LANGUAGE FORM: PRESENT

If you eat {PRESENT}, you WILL {PRESENT} NOT have

We began our journey viewing the verb form “WILL” in the Fields of Time.

We noted there is not really a FUTURE shape for the verb form WILL.
We do not say *will will.

The verb form WILL maps on the FUTURE already in the PRESENT grammatical shape.

We can compare Modal uses of WILL
85. She WILL be reading now.
(I am sure she is reading now.)

*****

2ND CONDITIONAL

TARGET GRAMMATICAL TIME: THE PRESENT

86. If you ate the cookie, you WOULD NOT have it.

LANGUAGE FORM: PAST

If you ate {PAST}, you WOULD {PAST} NOT have

*****

3RD CONDITIONAL

TARGET GRAMMATICAL TIME: THE PAST

87. If you had eaten the cookie, you WOULD NOT have had it.

LANGUAGE FORM: ANTECEDENT PAST

If you had eaten {ANTECEDENT PAST},
you WOULD NOT have {ANTECEDENT PAST} had

*****

4TH (MIXED) CONDITIONAL

TARGET GRAMMATICAL TIME: THE PAST and PRESENT

88. If you had eaten the cookie, you WOULD NOT have it.

LANGUAGE FORM: ANTECEDENT PAST and PAST

If you had eaten {ANTECEDENT PAST},
you WOULD {PAST} NOT have

*****

We have marked our HAVES: If you HAD eaten the cookie, you WOULD NOT HAVE had it then.

The syntactic HAVE is green. The head verb, the notional HAVE is mauve and underlined. It may mean keeping, tolerating, or. . . eating something.

We may compare examples about Chantelle Règle having her extra Larousse, in SUB-CHAPTER 8.1.

Syntax can make us prone to interpret the notional HAVE as keeping something, in examples as 91a―d, though we can eat meals as well as have them.

Do we have to adopt the Conditional, to use Conditional patterns? Let us compare ideas.

Some grammars will say we use the First Conditional when the probability of something is high, and we use the Second for things more probable than those in the Third.

Grammars that reject the Conditional may support structures they name the Unreal Past. Let us consider the probability for saying,

89. If I WERE you, I WOULD . . .
(Please find the comment on the use of WERE also in exercise 62.)

*****

Skimming can be part an effective learning strategy. We can go backward and forward in our study guides, to get a picture of the language itself. The more study guides, the better.

*****

The PROBABILITY to become another human individual literally and ever really is ZERO, for everyone.

90. *I AM you . . . / *You ARE me . . . ?
(There is zero probability, even if someone pretends another person.)

Example 92 could be the Second Conditional or Unreal Past. Regardless of the label, it conveys zero probability, for the PRESENT, PAST, as well as FUTURE.

What would be if he were …

… if he were her … and if she were him …?

Bob says an unreal past could not exist without an unreal present or future, and he really wants to go to the Himalayas.

Alice says there never could be literally such a time as unreal time; just as well, you could try to have a cat for an unreal dog.

She pretends she is seeing bubbles, when it comes to unreal reality, and practices that too, sometimes.

Feel welcome to the GRAMMAR GRAPEVINE.

Chantelle says the world’s worst advice she ever got always came with someone saying, “If I were you…”

She skips the phrase owing to her language economy, also when she listens. She feels different about saying or hearing, “If I were in your shoes…”

“I’d have fresh veg every morning.”

Bob is not thinking about the high Himalaya: he is too small. It is not only in highest mountainous areas we may want to manage, however.

91. If you HAD NOT taken care of it, this handle WOULD HAVE broken off.

Within the probability approach, example 91 is the 3rd Conditional, which tells about the least probable events. The example yet might be telling about a prevented thing.

Let us think about probability a little further.

92. If you take care of this handle now, it still MIGHT work.
(The probability is low.)

We can transform the example and say,

92a. If you take care of this handle now, it WILL work.
(The probability is very high.)

Both 92 and 92a could receive the same label — of the First Conditional — and they differ in PROBABILITY very much.

In 92, taking care of the handle is probable to result in its working.

In 92a, the probability amounts to CERTAINTY. Taking care of the handle is sure to bring a working condition.

PROBABILITY is not going to explain on the use of forms. Let us try LINGUISTIC RELATIVITY.

“It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.”
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, American President

Let us sum up. For theory or guesswork, we can use

PRESENT verb forms to speak about the FUTURE,
PAST forms to speak about the PRESENT,
and
ANTECEDENT PAST forms to speak about the PAST.

Feel welcome to
10.1. THE CONDITIONAL OR UNREAL PAST: REAL TIME.

*****

9.4. MODAL RELATIVITY PRACTICE

Exercise 53. We can warm up with arrow cues. Especially for Modal verbs, the cues indicate the target grammatical time, not the verb form. Here, both PRESENT and PAST forms can render a PRESENT grammatical target. For all of this exercise, our Modal time frame remains open.

Example: may

Answer: may be learning, or

might be learning

Exercise 54. We can try other verbs with the task from exercise 53. Let us remember about the stative use of verbs. We can use the variable {ON} for it, regardless of a Progressive cue.

Example: read, may

Answer: may be reading, or
might be reading

1. write; 2. have (a good memory); 3. work; 4. know; 5. love; 6. think; 7. recall; 8. consider; 9. joke; 10. play.

Exercise 55. Let us try “jumping” time extents. We can view the flow of time as on a symbolic line.

Our cues mean,

“One time extent forward”,

“One time extent backward”.

Example: In Washington D.C., you WILL BE ABLE TO visit the Library of Congress.

We give the target time cue and relative frame, for the underlined forms.
Answer: In Washington D.C., you can / may visit the Library of Congress.

1. After a day of a hop-on and hop-off the Washington trolley, you MAY feel you should have bought a two-day ticket.

2. In Washington, we were renting right on the Potomac. The area was lovely. You just HAD TO take a walk along the river.

3. You MUST book your seats in the Lisner Auditorium. The American Air Force jazz ensemble may perform live.

4. You NEED TO give up on wading in the waterfalls of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Park. It is not allowed.

5. You MAY enter the National Gallery of Art on first-come basis.

*****

From the key: natural language happens to involve text rich interpretation. The “Washington trolley” will be the Washington trolley tour, for example.

Kids or adults, students or teachers, everybody uses rich interpretation of text. It would be cumbersome to provide all details every time we speak, whatever the language.

We can learn to check on facts and trivia. Here is a sample search over Google. We just type Washington trolley in the search field.
https://www.google.ie/search?q=Washington+trolley&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gws_rd=cr&ei=Af2dV4bSOqLFgAa-vZrABQ

Example 1 has the Modal phrase “MAY feel” for a nodal reference. The phrase “SHOULD have bought” is a subordinate. We may have a peek at SUB-CHAPTER 10.1.

HAVE TO can be a real-time closed frame and the infinitive. A phrase as, “We had to have worked hard”, would tell about facts, not theory.

Many grammars will tell we can use BE ABLE TO rather than MAY, to refer to the FUTURE. However, if we resolve on example 3 as, “the ensemble will be able to perform”, we imply the ensemble might have difficulty playing, and the matter is about probability, not ability.

We can think about MAY with an open relative frame, to suggest prospect: “(Tomorrow) the American Air Force jazz ensemble MAY perform live”.

In example 5, we talk about permission. We may choose to say, “We will be able to / We will be allowed to…”

Exercise 56. We try “targeting” time extents. Our target time extent is the one in which we “land”.

We can refer for examples to American literature. These here invoke the ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN by Mark Twain. Let us be flexible, especially with examples 3 and 5.

Example: I thought I WOULD behave a while, if I COULD.

Answer: I think I WILL behave a while, if I CAN.

I think I WOULD behave a while, if I COULD.
(We mind the grammatical Relativity.)

1. But how CAN we do it, if we don’t know what it is?

2. The widow rung a bell for supper, and you HAD TO come to time.

3. And more ― they‘VE GOT TO (HAVE TO) waltz that palace around over the country wherever you want it, you understand.

4. It fetched us a dollar a day apiece, all the year round ― more than a body COULD tell what to do with.

5. Well, three or four months run along, and it was well into the winter, now. I had been to school most all the time, and COULD spell, and read, and write just a little, and COULD say the multiplication table up to six times seven is thirty-five, and I don’t reckon I COULD ever get any further than that if I was to live forever.

*****

From the key: The phrases “you understand” (example 3), or “I don’t reckon” (example 5), tell the time of the narrator, the character that tells the story.

Human lives are not just stories, but the narrator time can help comprehend the notional time, the time of the person who speaks.

There is no universal notional time. We have to learn to keep own notional times. We can have our notional time for our psychological time, too.

The phrase “if I was to live forever” is an example of figurative thinking. CHAPTER 10 has more. Part Three expands on parts of speech, as in “three or four months run along”.

*****

Exercise 57. Let us try to choose our Modals. We can stay on associations with Huckleberry for the while.

Example: He MAY / WILL be in the woods now.
(I know that he is in the woods.)

Answer: He WILL be in the woods now.

1. Let us not worry about it. There WILL / CAN be no advantage to it.
(It is certain that there is going to be no advantage.)

2. They HAD TO go / MAY HAVE gone out to the woods.
(The woods are not the only way.)

3. You SHOULD learn / SHOULD HAVE learned the way through the woods.
(Now is the time to learn.)

4. You MAY / WILL get lost in these woods.
(It is certain.)

5. They HAD TO get / MAY HAVE gotten lost in the woods.
(We are looking for them. The only way is through the woods.)

6. You SHOULDN’T/ CAN’T get lost in these woods.
(It is impossible. You know the way very well.)

7. He DIDN’T HAVE TO get / COULDN’T HAVE gotten lost in the woods.
(He knew the way.)

8. They MUST HAVE / MAY HAVE gotten lost in the woods.
(They took the way through the woods.)

9. You MAY / HAVE TO avoid the way through the woods.
(It is not safe.)

10. You WOULD HAVE / SHOULD HAVE gotten lost in the woods.
(That was certain.)

*****

From the key: In example 4, the Modal verb WILL tells about CERTAINTY for the PRESENT and the FUTURE. The FUTURE is usually an open context, the way life on Earth has been.

We use WILL when we are sure or resolved about something. We may compare example 3 in Exercise 55, and try to avoid the cumbersome, soothsayer style that would result from using WILL for all FUTURE forms.

*****

Exercise 58. Our story is now about general POTENTIALITY and PROBABILITY, in the grammatical PAST. We do not need the auxiliary time here. Our hypothetical frame remains open.

We can be back with the dayfly from EXERCISE 43. As in exercise 42, we keep our grammatical thinking even when words are unusual.

Example: The dayfly (can think) about physical matter, without butterflies.

Answer: The dayfly was able to think about physical matter, without butterflies.

1. The dayfly (consider) it somewhat rude of the butterfly to make reservations on the wings. They (may differ), but there (be) no reason for the remark. Anyway, now the butterfly (have to be) far away, with its wings.

2. The dayfly (start) to think about infinity. If there (be) infinity, the word “infinite” (can) only denote it. You (need) five letters to write the word. The letters and the word (be) undeniably finite.
(NEED can be a head verb. Compare APPENDIX 1.)

3. There (have to be) some matter to the alphabet, the dayfly thought. Five letters (can make) an eight-letter word (!) You just (need to compose) them.

4. The number of possible words you (can make) with the alphabet (have to be) innumerable. That (be) the closest approximation to infinity the dayfly (may envision).

5. Letters also (can express) numbers. The dayfly (think) about other alphabets.

6. If there (will be) anything universal about all letters in the world, that (can be) the essence of writing. Nothing as universal readily (occur) to the dayfly, however.

7. Letters (may take) various shapes. Only language (may give) writing its matter.

8. The dayfly (start musing) if there (may be) universal thoughts.

*****

From the key: in example 1, the phrase “might differ” tells about holding to an opinion. We can give it an open frame. It is up to our choosing if and what opinions we hold. Further journey has more detail on Modal frames and nodal time.

We can be back with the westerly from EXERCISE 44.

*****

Exercise 59. The westerly is in the mountains. So far, our Modal time frames were ready for us: we only adapted the verb. Now, we have to decide if we open the frame or close it.

Generally, we are in the grammatical PAST. On top of everything, we think about Expression: we learn to manage big, real-life language information pools.

Example: The westerly (can gambol) on the shore a little longer, but it (gather) to go see the future: the mountains.

Answer: The westerly COULD HAVE gamboled on the shore a little longer, but it gathered to go see the future: the mountains.

1. What (will happen) about the present time ? The westerly (can perceive) something indivisible and intermediate about time. Time (be) in a way continuous. It (have to consist) of parts, however.

2. The present (have to border) on the past and the future. The present (be) somehow intermediary between the past and the future. However, how long (will) the present (be)? Sometimes, you (can view) the present as lasting as long as a day. Sometimes, it (will last) a split second.

3. Well, you (can) N (exist) only in the future or only in the past. With this regard, there always (will be) a present moment that (will be) the only present. There (will be) N anything of the past or the future, in the present?

4. The wester (get) to the mountains. They (be) its present now. The wester (can) N (think) about a more beautiful present. It (need) N the ocean to see something beautiful anymore.

5. How these beautiful mountains (can emerge)? The wester (speculate) if winds (may shape) part their structure.

*****

From the key: With example 4, if we say the wester “COULDN’T think about a more beautiful present”, we place the situation in the mountains.

Alternately, if we say the wind “COULDN’T HAVE thought about a more beautiful present”, we close the frame on the time before the wind came to the mountains, when it was on the shore, in exercise 44.

*****

Grammar books will have much advice on Modal verbs with patterns named the Unreal Past or Conditional. For a comparison, let us try a grammar theory of relativity.

Our use of the word “relativity” is not about physics or families. It is linguistic. Feel welcome to CHAPTER 10.

*****

9.2. THE MODAL TIME FRAME

Neither the Modal verb form alone, as COULD or MIGHT, nor Modal syntax alone, as COULD HAVE or MIGHT HAVE, is capable of telling the target grammatical time.

However, in all natural languages, we always speak or write in context. This means that our linguistic activity always has a cognitive ground.

We may recur to SUB-CHAPTER 6.2. Our example was Madame Règle, coming to lunch between 1.00 and 2.00 p.m., or not showing up at all.
At 1:30, Latimer Sauf might say,

7. I haven’t seen her today.

At 2:30, Monsieur Sauf might say,
7a. I didn’t see her today.

It was his knowledge of the context to give him the cognitive ground.

So far, our verbs have been regular or irregular, but the patterns they made showed the grammatical PRESENT from PAST or FUTURE directly.

We have had green extents to symbolize their target grammatical time.
Very often, the target grammatical time in what we say is the same as real time.
We may recur to SUB-CHAPTER 5.1.

Modal patterns are not so clear. We might say,
46. We have the time, we COULD go for a walk today;
46a. We are going to have the time, we COULD go for a walk tomorrow;
or
46b. We had the time yesterday and we COULD go for a walk.

The pattern alone, “We could go for a walk”, does not tell the target grammatical time and makes no difference for the real-time today, tomorrow, or yesterday.

We can grant Modal forms an extent of a different color. Let it be tea rose.

Let us try a different color also for our time frames. To see how the frames could work with Modal verbs, let us think up a possible context.

Let us say, Jill lives on the West Coast. Her place has a large lounge with a view to the ocean. When you come to visit, you can sit down and look to the Pacific.

Madame Règle has visited Jill a few times so far. We may think about her most recent visit.

47. “You could sit down in the lounge, Chantelle. I‘ll make us some tea”, says Jill, greeting Madame Règle.

(Chantelle is Madame Règle’s first name. We may know she is not a systematic person, also from SUB-CHAPTER 6.2)

*****

The USA is not a monolingual country. Millions of people speak Spanish, Chinese, French, German, and other languages, in America. French is widely spoken in Louisiana, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, for example. Could Chantelle Règle be an American?
(Names do not prescribe on personalities or citizenships.)

*****

Our Modal time frame is open, though we are not using the auxiliary HAVE, in the phrase “you COULD sit down”.

For our real time, only Perfect tenses have an open frame, and they always use the auxiliary HAVE. We can compare our example above,
7. I haven’t seen her today.

Why have an open frame for the Modal form “COULD”?

We have an open frame for Perfect tenses, as they always make more than one reference to time.

If we have written, the activity started some time before our speaking about it. If we will have written, we expect the activity will be taking place some time before a FUTURE moment.

Modal verbs also make more than one reference to time. Let us focus on the Modal verb CAN.

I CAN see.
(The ability does not belong with the PRESENT, only.)

I CAN see an opportunity for this to be actually working.
(The specific instance does belong with the PRESENT, but the ability to see opportunity does not.)

The Modal form COULD is capable of all grammatical time, as we have noted above:
We COULD go for a walk today, or tomorrow;
If we were able to find some time yesterday,
We COULD and DID go for a walk.

Let us view the real-time and Modal frames together. The main time is the PRESENT. Our green frame is closed on the PRESENT.

We can think about the open Modal frame for things generally offered, allowed, or possible, also in the PAST.

48. When you visited Jill, you always could sit down in the lounge and look to the ocean.

The Modal form is the same for the PRESENT and the PAST.

Let us focus on the auxiliary HAVE and the frame, open or closed.
We can think about a phrasing as,
“You might have learned”.

We might view the above as correspondent with the Present Perfect,
Maybe you have learned;
our open time frame.

Our theory would look the same about a phrase as
Maybe you learned,
a Past Simple form,
our closed time frame.

There is no difference in the Modal form,
“You might have learned”,
whether we view it as corresponding with the phrase,
“maybe you have learned”
(PRESENT Perfect),
or the phrase
“maybe you learned”
(PAST Simple).

Modal forms do not tell what actually happened, has happened, happens, or is going to happen. They give theory, guesswork, or hypotheses. Their time is not the real-time. It is the theory time.

To compare the Perfect Aspects, the auxiliary HAVE can help map and talk like about real paths and environments.

For theory, we do not have to come up with “theoretical paths”. We can think about the hypothesis open or closed time frame. The syntactic HAVE can work as a time anchor, then.

49. I thought the handle MIGHT HAVE / COULD HAVE broken off.
(I was not there. It turned out it was still in place.)

The time frame for the hypothesis is closed.

Our syntactic HAVE will look still more of a device, when we think about knowledge of what happens.

50. You COULD HAVE been more careful with the handle.

We could be looking at a broken handle and hear,

50a. I was. Someone else MUST HAVE broken it off.

To recur to our examples with a walk: if we close a Modal frame, we may suggest that something did not happen.

51. We had the time yesterday, and we COULD go for a walk; it was lovely.

51a. We COULD HAVE gone for a walk yesterday, we had enough time, but Jim came in, and we stayed to study.

However, we cannot have Modal syntax for merely equivalent with the Negative, and there is no universal rule for Modal frames.
We also could say,

51b. We had plenty of time yesterday, and we COULD go to the movies, we COULD go for a walk, or we COULD go see Jill.

But Jim came in and brought those books we didn’t have, and we stayed in to study. Jill joined in.

*****

Modal verbs do not tell what really happens, has happened, happened, or is going to happen. Their forms may not differ for real-time today, yesterday, or tomorrow.

We can say their time is relative to real time, and economize on our real-time cognitive variables.

52. Maybe we HAVE learned something good. {TO}

52a. Maybe we learned something good. {ON}

A Modal phrase as
52b. We MIGHT HAVE learned something good,
does not tell between the real-time variables {TO} and {ON}.

Modal phrases yet will tell our value {IN}.

53. Maybe we were learning something good. {IN}
53a. Maybe we HAVE been learning something good. {AT}

We can make a hypothesis:
53b. We MIGHT HAVE been learning something good.

The Modal phrase retains the variable {IN}.

For relative time, we may just balance the variables {ON} and {IN}, and mind if our relative time frame is open or closed: hypothetical time anyway cannot the same as real duration.

We can call this our Modal net. We net (nullify as non-essential) the Perfect, our variable {TO}, for Modal forms. Our Modal phrases will become much simpler to make, and we remain correct according to classic grammars (!)

This is why we had all the practice with the word “handle”, in SUB-CHAPTER 9.1. We cannot be “fixed” on word forms. We need to learn to net them, sometimes.

Part Four has the nodi of time. Jemma says it is vital to have good gimmicks to make those, and the Modal net with relative frames is such a good gizmo.

Please note that our devices are linguistic tools. We do not follow the term of the “language acquisition device”, for human brains. We stay with human language faculties.

We keep our auxiliary HAVE always green, whether it brings an open or closed time frame. We retain only the basic distinction between auxiliary and head verbs. Grammar anyway requires thinking, and it would not be a good idea to get dependent on crayons.

Let us get to a few details on Modal structures, before we exercise.
9.3. DETAIL ON MODAL STRUCTURES

*****

8.1. EARTHLING BASIC VARIABLE

PLANET EARTH FROM ONE MILLION MILES AWAY,
PICTURE BY NASA DEEP SPACE CLIMATE OBSERVATORY.

Let us compare the Simple and the Perfect, our cognitive values {ON} and {TO}, for the verb to HAVE.

As in EXERCISE 14, we can think about language content and inner framework.

In the auxiliary role, the verb to HAVE works for the framework. We mark it green. As a content verb, it can tell about ownership. We mark it mauve then, as all content verbs.

*****

Madame Règle speaks excellent American English. Her friendship with Jill Smith started over a website forum discussing philosophy and linguistics.

They agreed that Latin had had {TO} influence over English and French thought, although the languages belonged to diverse language groups.

*****

This is one of the reasons for some French reference in our grammar voyage. Latin has affected {TO} both English and French languages.

On the other hand, English and French have {ON} very dissimilar shapes. English is a Germanic language, and French belongs with the Romance language group. Some American insignia have {ON} Latin mottos.

We could hear or read sometimes that American English is an international language. There are no international languages really. Esperanto does not have {ON} many features of a natural language.

We can say that American English is a lingua franca, that is, a tongue spoken worldwide.

By origin of the phrase, we can associate a lingua franca with free speech. In Latin, the adjective “francus” also meant someone exempt from service, someone at liberty.

The Roman Empire rule over the present-day territory of France collapsed early, and ancient Romans knew the local people as Franks, READ IN WIKIPEDIA.

America and France have had {TO} historic ties. The French were American allies in the WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. The Statue of Liberty is a memorial to American independence and alliance with the French.

There are many Statues of Liberty. The most famous statues are those in New York and Paris. A French sculptor, FRÉDÉRIC BARTHOLDI, designed the Statue.

Bartholdi patented it as Liberty Enlightening the World (La Liberté éclairant le monde, in French). The American statue stands on the Liberty Island, in New York Harbor.

*****

Madame Règle has {ON} a small book of poetry with her today. She has finished {TO} the book about Descartes. At home, she has {ON} a big volume about influences between French and English thinkers.

She has been reading {AT} two book series, poetry or philosophical commentary, one at a time, all this week.

Latimer Sauf is not surprised at her reading habit. The special edition of Larousse Gastronomique he got from her last Christmas has {ON} an elevated and celebrated place in his restaurant main hall.

The guests have turned {TO} many of the pages so far. He has had {TO} another copy to read at home. He has been studying {AT} it to detail. He has {ON} extra Larousse dishes on his menu.

*****

Let us focus on the grammatical time and cognitive variable.

FUTURE
He WILL HAVE been reading; {AT}

PRESENT
He HAS been reading; {AT}

PAST
He HAD been reading. {AT}

We can compare the beginning of our language journey, the Fields of Time (CHAPTER 1).

How does the Perfect Progressive change for the PRESENT, PAST, and FUTURE? It is the verb to have to change.

The verb to have changes the same as in our Fields of Time, for our cognitive variable {ON}, the Simple Aspect.

FUTURE
He WILL HAVE a book; {ON}

PRESENT
He HAS a book; {ON}

PAST
He HAD a book. {ON}

Let us compare the cognitive variable {IN}. In the content role, the verb to have can also tell about eating. Madame Règle likes the extra Larousse dishes by Monsieur Sauf.

FUTURE
Tomorrow at this hour, Madame Règle
WILL BE having her extra Larousse and reading a book; {IN}

PRESENT
Madame Règle
IS having her extra Larousse and reading a book now; {IN}

PAST
When Jill walked into the restaurant yesterday, Madame Règle
WAS having her extra Larousse and reading a book.{IN}

Let us compare the variable {ON}. Here are our Fields of Time, again.

FUTURE
She WILL BE at the restaurant; {ON}

PRESENT
She IS at the restaurant; {ON}

PAST
She WAS at the restaurant. {ON}

For all tenses, this is always the first element in the verb pattern to change for the grammatical time. It changes the same in our Fields of Time, the same as for our variable {ON}.

Let us compare all Aspects. The elements that adapt for the grammatical time are underlined.

We can view the value {ON} as a basis for other Aspects.

We also can focus on the value {ON} and view other Aspects as syntactic expansion.

Please mind that finding a basic value does not impose any particular order to use the values, especially if we come to the resolve that our {ON, IN, TO} and {AT} can be our learned cognitive variables.

*****

Let us turn to American English as it is really. We do not intend to invent a new language.

This is a dream come true. And I’m loving every minute of it.
(NBC Today Sun as in the CORPUS OF CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN ENGLISH, COCA.)

The Simple Aspect can tell what we have {ON} our cognitive map. What we perceive does not have to take up an entire extent.

Even if we regard an entire cognitive extent, it does not have to imply that we are preoccupied. Another way round, we live on planet Earth, and none of us could preoccupy it.

*****

The Progressive Aspect, the value {IN}, can help mark a matter as different from the regular and basic {ON}.

To compare space, we may feel as IN an area, rather than ON a regular cognitive map, for matters we perceive as irregular or EMPHATIC.

The Progressive can help delineate in time, on something out of the ordinary, as a dream come true: dreams coming true are not anything regular.

*****

In this view, we can have the value {AT} for the most divergent from the regular, basic {ON}.

Could we have a natural feeling to return to the basic variable, after we “go away”? The following example looks spontaneous and shows our matter well.

{AT} I’ve been loving it. But {ON} I want to keep doing different things.
(People magazine as in COCA.)

Some classic grammars might not agree to have verbs as “to love” or “to hate” in the Progressive at all. However, if to let anybody PRESCRIBE what language should be like, we might have to recur to MIDDLE ENGLISH.

*****

American English is a live language, and live languages also change. Thinking about free speech, let us consider a cognitive difference, for the two forms:
“I hate you”,
or
“I am hating you”.

We can compare human perception on physical space.

“I am hating you” is {IN} an area only.

“I hate you” is {ON} the entire extent.

Our grammar is correct when it properly renders how we feel and think.

To speak American freely, we should choose independently if we say that we are hating or loving something, or that we hate or love it.

This can be our earthling proper egoism: we have our inner grammars work for our minds, rather than adapt our minds to rules that cannot be universal, anyway.

The variable {ON} can be our earthling and basic variable. Who knows, maybe the ancient Latin rules, from which classic grammars derive, emerged owing to human variables, only they were not called variables then, hence the “stative use of verbs”?

Naturally, classicist or generativist, we do not have to be always gravely serious about everything we say.

*****

VARIABLES OR OPTIONS?

We may come across presentations of language as features.

An Aspect both Perfect and Progressive would be the Perfect Progressive. An Aspect neither Perfect nor Progressive would be the Simple.

Some approaches might attempt a picture for language as made of options. However, our brains are live structures and have simultaneous processes.

When we use the Present Simple, our paths for the Perfect Progressive for example do not become “switched off”. If we use the Progressive, we do not exclude a possibility for the same thing to happen also in a manner we describe in the Simple:

“I‘m loving you”,

would not mean

“I don’t love you”.

Planet Earth is our natural habitat. When we people think what there is {ON} a geographical map, we do not exclude possibilities for places {IN} areas, routes {TO} places, as well as locations {AT} places.

Humans are likely to learn languages {ON} a planet for an indeterminate future. Even astronauts learn {ON} Earth.

Associating language, thinking, feeling, and generally space is natural. What would feelings, thoughts, or works be — without room?

Finally, our variable {ON} does not correspond with an option as OFF. We do not turn our brains off, also when we go to sleep.

We can conclude that Aspects are not options. Options can be mutually exclusive. To take one option, we would have to exclude other choices. Variables work together, also simultaneously.

Feel welcome to practice.

8.2. PRACTICE FOR ALL ASPECTS

*****

CHAPTER 8. ALCHEMY OF TIME FOR BEGINNERS

Most grammar resources agree that we have four Aspects in English, the Simple, the Progressive (or Continuous), the Perfect, and the Perfect Progressive (or Perfect Continuous).

By the label, we can say the Perfect Progressive should have features of the Perfect and the Progressive.

We extracted general patterns for the Simple, Progressive, and Perfect in SUB-CHAPTER 3.1.

We can compare Perfect Progressive examples, as online or in books, and note a general pattern for it, too.
FUTURE:
I will have been reading.

PRESENT:
I have been reading.

PAST:
I had been reading.

Let us think how to build this pattern. We can reckon the verb to be from the Progressive takes the place for the head verb in the Perfect pattern.

The verb to have in the Perfect attracts the third form. The Progressive auxiliary be takes on the third form, within the Perfect pattern.

We can have the Perfect Progressive for a merger of the Perfect and the Progressive. Our alchemy makes room for the head verb in the merged, Progressive pattern.

We have correlated the Simple, Progressive, and Perfect Aspects with cognitive mapping values, {ON}, {IN}, and {TO}.
Please compare CHAPTER 4.

We can use the Perfect to say what has progressed TO a time.

We can use the Progressive to tell what is progressing IN a time.

The two combined, the Perfect Progressive can help tell what has been progressing IN a stretch of time we refer TO another time.

What language marker (preposition) could we choose for our merged variable? We could think about “into”, to join the “in” and “to”.

However, “into” may mean the same as “in” or “to” alone, dependent on the context. The westerly wind frolicked into eddies, in exercise 44 (SUB-CHAPTER 7.1).

“Into” may make an impression more formal or emphatic than “in” or “to” on their own.

Let us think about the preposition AT.

Something has been progressing AT this time.

If our moment in time belongs with the FUTURE, we can say,
AT a time, something will have been progressing.

If our moment belongs with the PAST, we can say,
AT a time, something had been progressing.

Some grammar books will associate our feature {TO} with the Aspect we also can name the Perfect Simple. Some may have the name Perfect Continuous, for our variable {AT}.

Psycholinguistics says that naming processes do not change the ways language forms can work for brains. Book authors are people, and people happen to differ in approaches. Language forms can work regardless of grammar labels.

Our visualization is not to fix a picture for language. We do not have to stay with the same visuals for all time. We can present our mapping on one extent, as well as a few extents.

We can merge our Progressive and Perfect arrow cues (please refer to SUB-CHAPTER 5.1).

Perfect tenses have an open time frame: they connote another, simultaneous reference in time.

Let us think about the Perfect Simple. The PRESENT Perfect Simple can embrace some time with reference TO the PRESENT.

17. Madame Règle has lived in Paris for fifteen years.

The open frame here looks TO the PRESENT, regarding a time fifteen years ago.

The PAST Perfect Simple can refer one time in the PAST TO another time in the PAST.

17a. Before moving to Paris, Madame Règle had lived and worked in Lyon, the silk capital of France, for five years.

The open time frame looks TO the PAST, regarding a time five years before.

The FUTURE Perfect Simple may look to a time span from the PRESENT TO the FUTURE. Our basic or nodal time reference is the PRESENT, but we can think about the PAST as well.

17b. Tomorrow, Madame Règle will have lived and worked in France for twenty years.
(Altogether, in France, she has lived in Lyons and Paris.)

Madame Règle is an avid reader. She never really reads one book only. She usually has a small book with her, tied to her bag with a colorful scarf like with a string. She says that actually being able to look at a book makes it more present to her mind. At the same time, there is always another, bigger book she reads at home.

The practiced school habit of stringing books together might have had its advantages. Jill shares the behavior sometimes.

The Perfect Progressive makes a dual time reference and has an open time frame, the same as Perfect Simple. The Perfect Progressive can highlight a process, its time span or dynamism.

Let us think about the verb to read. We write the verb to read identically in the first, second, and third form. We say it differently.

1st form 2nd form 3rd form

read read read

[rI:d] [re:d] [re:d]

The verb to have takes the third form.

17c. Madame Règle has read [re:d] a book about a French thinker, René Descartes.
(She has finished.) {TO}

When we merge the Perfect and the Progressive, our pattern has room for the head verb in the Progressive.

17d. She has been reading [rI:dI Ƞ] a series of philosophical commentary books.
(Her reading is still in progress, she has not finished yet.) {AT}

We do NOT use the third form twice, and we do not add the ING to it. The following example shows the potential error.

17e. She has been * [re:dI Ƞ].

Let us return to our variable {ON}. Could we have it for our basic cognitive reference? Feel welcome to further journey.
8.1. EARTHLING BASIC VARIABLE

*****

7.1. PRACTICE FOR THE HEART AND THE MIND

Exercise 39. Let us provide synonyms for stative and dynamic senses of the verbs below. We can use the Infinitive also with the Progressive.

SUB-CHAPTER 2.1. presents the Infinitive.
APPENDIX 1 lays out the basics about verbs.

Example: to think

Answer:
stative, variable {ON}
to consider, to believe
*****
dynamic, variable {IN}
to be cerebrating, to be pondering

1. to see; 2. to expect; 3. to taste; 4. to feel; 5. to value; 6. to consider; 7. to smell; 8. to prize; 9. to look; 10. to ponder; 11. to mind; 12. to remember; 13. to denote; 14. to import; 15. to touch; 16. to mark; 17. to express; 18. to observe; 19. to figure; 20. to typify.

Exercise 40. We paraphrase the verbs and tell where we could take the ING, and where we would mostly stay {ON} our cognitive extents. Our answers do not have to be identical. Humans differ in stative verb use.

1. to hold; 2. to consist; 3. to keep; 4. to appear; 5. to indicate; 6. to argue; 7. to suggest; 8. to signify; 9. to matter; 10. to concern.

Exercise 41. Let us think over the various impressions that phrases as “I’m loving it” or “I’m hating it” might give.

Exercise 42. It happens in conversations: our grammar is good, but we do not know a particular word, or we know the words, but we are not familiar with the way someone puts words together, and confused about the words, we get confused about grammar, too.

Language about thinking and feeling can be elaborate. Here, we learn to keep our grammar against even unusual wording.

We continue comparing the mapping variables {ON} and {IN}, for the grammatical Aspect. We have only part the arrow cues (see SUB-CHAPTER 5.1.). We are staying in the grammatical PAST.

Our story is about the GREENSHANK’S closest relative, the GREATER YELLOWLEGS, meeting the LESSER YELLOWLEGS.

GREATER YELLOWLEGS, PHOTO BY MIKE BAIRD, WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The tale is a little inspired with ARISTOTLE and intended to be mildly humorous. Regarding criticism on Aristotle, feel welcome to the BOOK INFORMATION.

A self-respecting story tells about animals or objects that think and talk, not about humans ascribed animal or thing features. Such is our story. The birds really have different songs.

Example: One late afternoon, the Greater Yellowlegs 1. (hear) the two-note ditty in the crescent near the shore. Cousin Lesser 2. (chirp) mighty out of tune (!)
CUES

Answer: heard, variable {ON}; was chirping, variable {IN}

A. The Greater 3. (fly) up to the path and 4. (think) about the reason for the ditty. Sure Nature 5. (give) it some melody. Speaking about it in detail yet 6. (can be) a huge enterprise.

B. The Greater 7. (ponder) on some of the particulars, when he 8. (see) the Lesser Yellowlegs by the seashore.

C. The Lesser Yellowlegs 9. (can try) the three-note whistle, it N 10. (be) in violation of the laws of physics, 11. (argue) the Greater Yellowlegs. The Lesser Yellowlegs 12. (appear) very similar in size.

D. “Not without a memory aid”, the Lesser 13. (retort). The two-note 14. (be) the only melody he 15. (know) by heart.

E. The Greater Yellowlegs 16. (expect) the refutation. However, there always 17. (exist) Thought, for rare but possible sounds.

F. Rare sounds 18. (feel) heroic, the Lesser Yellowlegs (observe). Education 19. (mean) both unpopularity and wisdom, whichever 20. (import) worse individually.

G. The uncouth absurd of the situation 21. (consist) in being out of place without moving, the Greater Yellowlegs 22. (declare).

H. The Lesser Yellowlegs 23. (deem) that impossible. One place 24. (involve) one place, however negative the relation.

I. The two 25. (meditate) steadily, when the Lesser 26. (sigh). Elaborating on the two-note 28. (chance) the common sense.

*****

From the key: the variable {ON} can tell an activity that got on a cognitive map or extent when something else was in its course: the two were meditating steadily, when the Lesser sighed. There are more examples in exercises that follow.

*****

Exercise 43. We compare the variables {ON} and {IN} within all grammatical time, the PRESENT, PAST, and FUTURE. As there is more language logic to manage, we have all arrow cues.

Our next story is about a creature from the Cimmerian Bosporus, the dayfly. The inspiration for the story comes from Aristotle’s Metaphysics, see over INTERNET ARCHIVE.

Example: According to a legend, it is around the summer solstice that dayflies 1. (come) to exist in the Cimmerian Bosporus. A dayfly 2. (begin) its life in the morning, and 3. (die) before the second day sunset.

Answer: come, begins, dies; {ON}

A. It 4. (be) early morning. The dayfly 5. (flutter) its wings in the sunrise light. “I 6. (be) a day-fly”, it 7. (think). The circumstance 8. (give) it its name.

B. The morning 9. (be) very bright and fresh. The dayfly 10. (wonder) over the water and the air, the green and the colorfulness of vegetation, when it 11. (see) a dry leaf.

C. It 12. (see) how water 13. (come) from the earth and the air. It 14. (cogitate) if dry leaves 15. (belong) with green leaves.

D. It 16. (fly) past a vividly red rose flower when a butterfly 17. (stop) it for a little conversation. “You 18. (seem) to be this most daily of creatures”, the butterfly 19. (say).

E. “Right, I 20. (name) myself a dayfly”, the dayfly 21. (respond). “Living for a day 22. (form) the essence of my existence. Nothing that 23. (become) can be eternal, anyway.

F. This 24. (be) very interesting”, the butterfly 25. (remark). “I sure also 26. (become).” — “I 27. (think) about it when I 28. (see) that dry leaf over there”, the dayfly 29. (reply).

G. “I 30. (contemplate) if the becoming of dry leaves 31. (happen) along the becoming of the day, dayflies, and… butterflies.”

H. The butterfly 32. (disapprove). “I sure N 33. (will answer) this! You 34. (can see) that we 35. (differ). Our wings 36. (be) dissimilar.”

I. “Nobody 37. (deny) this”, the dayfly 38. (concede). “It 39. (be) the becoming that I 40. (distrust).

J. This morning 41. (become) broad daylight, and this day 42. (become) a night. However, the day and the night 43. (can inhere) in disparate matters, I 44. (feel). One of them 45. (may be) the light.”

K. The butterfly 46. (shrug) its wings and 47. (fly) away.

*****

From the key: We can perceive the verb WILL as referring to the PRESENT or the FUTURE.

THE PRESENT
“I sure will not answer this!”
We can make a close synonym, saying,
“I have no wish to answer this.”

THE FUTURE
“This morning is becoming broad daylight,
and this day will become a night.”
We would make a close synonym, saying,
“This is what is going to happen.”

The verb to become has had a role in language history. We may get to know it better, further in the grammar journey.

We can interpret the word “day” as 24 hours on Earth, daytime, a time, age, or even an epoch. I hope you do your dictionary work (!)

*****

Exercise 44. We focus on the grammatical Time and Expression. To deny something, we can use the Negative. In our notes, we may distinguish the Negative with the letter N. To ask a question, we can use the Interrogative. We give it the question mark, (?).

First, we place our story mostly in the PRESENT. This manner to tell a story is the dramatic narrative. Then, we take the story to the PAST.

This should help us see how language logic can work together, for the grammatical time. Further in the journey, we may learn the Reported Speech.

Our story is about the westerly, the kind of wind that happens to rise in oceans. Westerlies influence the weather. Some scientists have blamed record temperatures, hot or cold, on splits in westerly currents.

Some observers even suspected extraterrestrial or supernatural influences over the weather, while it was… a westerly.

We have only part the arrow cues. We keep them, to work out a sense for target time. It can be very useful with Modal verbs.

Example: The westerly wind 1. (rise) in the high seas. Its resilient body of air 2. (give) its first sough.

Answer: The westerly wind rises in the high seas. Its resilient body of air gives its first sough.

A. It 3. (come) to the land and 4. (feel) a difference. Now, the high ocean 5. (be) the past and the land 6. (become) the present.

B. The shore 7. (delineate) the past and the present. It 8. (be) the limit for both. The wind 9. (play) with the matter, and 10. (frolic) into eddies.

C. The wester 11. (swirl), when the thought about the future 12. (come) to it. The ocean N 13. (be) the future to it. The shoreland N 14. (be) the future to it, either. Where 15. (be) the future?

D. Mountain peaks 16. (shine) their snowy cool in the moonlight. The wester 17. (get) there before the day 18. (begin)? The wester 19. (set) its course to the mountain range.

E. The shoreland 20. (change) from the wester’s present to the wester’s past. Then, there 21. (be) something indivisible and intermediate about the present. The mountains 22. (be) the wester’s present, when the wester 23. (get) there.

We take our story into the grammatical PAST. The verb WILL takes on another form, WOULD.

Answer: The westerly wind rose in the high seas. Its resilient body of air gave its first sough.

A1. It came to the land and felt a difference. Now, the high Ocean was the past and the land had become the present.

B1. The shore delineated the past and the present. It was the limit for both. The wind was playing with the matter and frolicking into eddies.

Please mind: we can use the variable {ON} for an activity that gets on the map, while something else is happening: The wester was swirling, when the thought about the future came to it.

We can envision our grammatical logic as interconnected.

Our logic for grammatical time can work in connected sets. Could we connect or merge our variables {IN} and {TO}? Feel welcome to further journey.
CHAPTER 8. THE PERFECT PROGRESSIVE

*****

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: