Tense Agreement Subordinate Clauses

Rule: Normally, the ancillary clause does not allow a form if the policy clause extends into the past. But if the secondary clause begins with “like,” then the secondary clause can be in all its forms. A main tension (current tension, future tension or perfect tension) in the upper clause is followed by a main tension in the indicative mood or the subjunctive mind. Such a main tension is followed:[6] In classical Greek, tensions in secondary clauses must match those of the upper clauses that govern them. [6] (Unlike Latin and Romance languages, however, the subjunctive mind has no time and will obviously not follow the times.) The sequence of times (known in Latin as consecutio temporum, also known as time agreement, succession of tensions and tense harmony) is a series of grammatical rules of a particular language that governs the concordance between verbs in related clauses or phrases. A few days ago, I asked whether a current current of tension in an ancillary clause could be followed by a tension passed in the main sentence. An experienced grammar (Andrew Leach) says yes, it is possible to have a current tension in a secondary clause and a form of past in a main sentence. In Latin, the consequence of the tension rule affects dependent verbs in the subjunctive mind, mainly on indirect issues, indirect orders and assignment clauses. [4] If the main verb is in one of the past periods, the subordinate verb is usually found in the current or perfect subjunctive (primary sequence); If the main verb is in one of the past times, the subjunctive verb is usually found in the imperfect or pluparous subjunctive (historical sequence). For example, if the subordinate verb refers to a period that is at the same time or later than the time of the principal, the current or imperfect subjunctive is used: The following examples show the use of characters in sub-sentences of objects depending on the tension of the verb in the main sentence. In English, a succession of tensions (backshifting) is often used in indirect language and similar contexts.

The sequence below can be summarized as follows: If the main verb of a sentence is in the past, other verbs must also express a past point of view, unless a general truth is expressed. [1] If the annex clause is in permanent tension, while the main clause is indefinite in the present, it means that the two actions are simultaneous. If the secondary clause is in the current total tension, while the main clause is indefinite in the current period, it means that the action described in the annex clause took place indefinitely before that of the main clause. If the ancillary clause is indefinite in the future, while the main clause is currently indeterminate, it means that the action described in the subsidiary clause will take place after the action of the policy clause.

Comments are closed.