Printable View
I've never mused about it until recently.
If you say, for example, "I'm being foolish" to mean that at the moment I make something that I never do all the time and thus present myself as a fool, which is not my feature (thank God! :) ).
And when I want to underline that I was foolish at that moment, how this construction must be changed?
You could say "I was being foolish" . Or "I was just being foolish"
Oh, thanks a lot, DDT. I had found myself in doubt and wanted to find out the appropriate words.
And the last point. Would it sound well enough: I have been being foolish?
"I have been being foolish, till you hit me with a log"? :D I mean, do you need a P.P.C. to express a duration before something happend in the past?
This sounds very bad. Never say "been being".Quote:
Originally Posted by Rtyom
DDT is correct.
But is it grammatically correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by kwatts59
As for me, I assume so. But now I see that "be" forms really spoil the picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerty
Possibly, in the same universe where "Я буду быть настойчивым" is grammatically correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerty
"Я буду бывать настойчивым" is well enough for some contexts, but at first sight sounds very weird.
In A Grammar of the English Language: Parts of Speech and Accidence (205-7), George O. Curme writes:
"Expanded Form. It is made up of a form of the copula be and the present participle of the verb to be conjugated. . . . [E.g. I am taking, I was taking, I have been taking, it is being taken, it was being taken, etc.]
"The expanded form, though now widely used, is not employed at all with the copula be if it is desired to impart progressive force. Thus we still say, as in older English, 'I am sick,' 'I have been here a month,' not 'I am being sick,' 'I have been being here a month.' The expanded form of the copula be always has terminate force. . . .
"The expanded form as used today has two quite different meanings.
"a. WITH PROGRESSIVE FORCE. The expanded form usually represents an act as going on: 'He is working in the garden.' There is thus usually an idea of progression or continuance associated with this form. Hence with such a verb as know we cannot use it at all, for know denotes a fact, something complete within itself, not something uncompleted that is still going on: 'I have known (not have been knowing) him for ten years.' . . . On the other hand, the expanded form cannot be employed with verbs denoting a condition, state, even though the idea of continuance is prominent, for it is generally restricted in its use to verbs denoting action: 'I have been (not have been being) sick all week.' We use the common form [i.e. the form without being] here. . . .
"b. WITH TERMINATE FORCE. The expanded form often represents the act as a whole, hence it has terminate force: 'I am sorry you doubt my statement. I am telling you the truth.' . . . The action here is not represented as going on. The reference is to an act as a whole. . . . We have been so often told that we should associate the expanded form with progressive force that we have overlooked the fact that it often has terminate force, i.e. indicates an act or state as a whole, as a fact. The expanded form of the copula be is always terminate: 'Perhaps I am being a fool, . . .' The expanded form refers to the particular moment in question.”
Therefore, a form like I have been being is impossible. The terminate force of the expanded be excludes the possibility of a an expanded present perfect tense in this case, because the present perfect tense denotes indefiniteness or generality, or refers to a time period not yet completed, i.e. a past continuing into the present. The present perfect tense cannot be used to refer to a specific moment in the past. So one may write I was or I was being to indicate a moment or moments in the past that is/are more or less clearly defined, especially in relation to an action or actions: “I was being spiteful when I made a bonfire of your clothes.” Forms like I have been can refer to mere existence, location, etc. or to a state or condition without any allusion to a particular time in the past: “I have been to Russia,” “I have been sick with the chicken pox before” (but “I was sick with the chicken pox before I started fourth grade,” because a particular time in the past is referred to), “I have been spiteful many times toward my acquaintances” (but “I was/was being spiteful only until I read your letter of apology”).
Thank you for such comprehensive material, Jeff.
Curme rules!