In article <4467a329$0$14778$4fafbaef@reader4.news.tin.it>,
"Lynda" <lynda@emaildespammed.it> wrote:
> I need to know if it's correct, in english, to use verbs in this
> way :
>
> - In 1997, Luke, CREATES a new company named ... blah blah blah
> - In 1995 that company, OBTAINS new partnerships ... blah blah blah
> - In 1980 his sister Sarah, LEAVES the company .... blah blah blah
> - In 1940, Miky STARTS to learn english.... blah blah blah
These are correct in one sense, but may be awkward, depending on what
the blah blah blah part is. The other form is:
> - In 1997, Luke CREATED a new company named ... blah blah blah
[Note: I deleted your stray comma, too]
> - In 1995 that company, OBTAINED new partnerships ... blah blah blah
> - In 1980 his sister Sarah, LEFT the company .... blah blah blah
> - In 1940, Miky STARTED to learn english.... blah blah blah
> I think you got what I mean ... is it correct to use "PRESENT" verb, with
> past dates ?
It can be -- again, in particular circumstances, mostly for literary
effect. The rule-of-thumb, though, would be to use the past tense for
past times.
The "present tense talking about the past" form is typically used in a
kind of narration that sort of "takes you back" to the previous time,
and then narrates it as if it were the present.
"In 1940, Mikey starts to learn English, only to find that his accent is
so heavy that his dream of being an anchorman are doomed to failure. He
continues studying under the top voice teachers of the day, though, and
eventually..." etc.
Again, this isn't "normal", but a not-uncommon style for a particular
type of narration. I tend to associate it with 50's era documentaries
or "newsreels" type film narration.
--
Please take off your shoes before arriving at my in-box.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
|
|