Bad actors stoking hate again (Southport Stabbings)

Nope, still no future tense.

No, you mean English doesn’t have an inflectional future tense that changes word spelling or adds prefixes suffixes etc etc to reflect past present or future, because unlike other European languages it’s less influenced by Latin verb inflection and grammar. If you want a language that doesn’t do even the conditional or uses auxiliary words – like English and many other languages do do infer future tense then you want German, where they say things like “We go to the movies tomorrow”

What are they basing that prediction on, out of interest? The ‘success’ of the ‘hostile environment’ over the past decade, or just the fact that we are such a basket-case of a country that there are now more attractive options for immigrants, skilled and unskilled?

A little of column A and a little of column B. Either way, if Starmer doesn’t **** it up monumentally, and on past performance – where his normal approach seems to be do nothing, do the wrong thing, then finally do the right thing that he should’ve done at the beginning, then Ill be surprised if he hits this particular nail on the head.

Maybe those arguing about grammar should start their own thread lol

How much of that ONS graph is predicated on “tough” government action reducing immigration, or is it that potential immigrants are realising the streets aren’t paved with gold and there are probably much better places in Europe to head to?

No, you mean English doesn’t have an inflectional future tense that changes word spelling or adds prefixes suffixes etc etc to reflect past present or future, because unlike other European languages it’s less influenced by Latin verb inflection and grammar.

Plus, you can do the same thing in Latin-influenced languages. For example, I will work tomorrow is je travaillerai demain. The verb is modified which we can’t do in English. But you could also say je vais travailler demain which is I am going to work tomorrow. Both languages talking about the future without modifying the verb to a future form.

As a very ropey French and Spanish speaker, I much prefer the latter…

Measuring success using net migration always worries the hell out of me. We aren’t exporting the kind of people who burn down libraries because of ‘legitimate concerns about immigration’, we’re exporting our doctors, chemists, engineers and more generally, people who have the funds to head off somewhere else.

How much of that ONS graph is predicated on “tough” government action reducing immigration, or is it that potential immigrants are realising the streets aren’t paved with gold and there are probably much better places in Europe to head to?

A bit is as a result of the previous govt making it hard to get here. Other European countries making it attractive to go there, immigration is always a movable feat, less Ukrainians, less Hong Kong Chinese, students going home, and fewer EU students.

Six weeks? Nowhere near enough time

Don’t politicians normally get 100 days to make an impression? Except Liz Truss of course. In her case it was clear after 100 hours how crap she was.

What are they basing that prediction on, out of interest?

The Torys massively increased the number of work and study visas made available in order to fill urgent job vacancies and to prop up universities. That led to an immediate surge in annual net immigration. Once you have the posts filled and a steady turnover of students there is no need for the same high levels of net immigration.

The previous government managed the dual feat of sending back qualified useful Europeans and allowing in legally record numbers of poorly qualified from elsewhere. And at the same time the goverment demonised refugees and people arriving on boats which reflected on all immigrants thus increasing racist sentiment and here we are now.

Je travaille demain/Je bosse demain

I think what people are mean when they talk about the future tense in English is actually the Aspect.  But we’re very much getting to (and in fact we’re probably well past) the limits of my knowledge of linguistics:

https://collins.co.uk/blogs/collins-elt/tense-vs-aspect

English doesn’t have a future tense but here goes

I will buy either a Vango or a Force 10. There you go, my future tense

When we say “bad actors” are we referring to people like Charlie Hunnam?

In her case it was clear after 100 hours how crap she was.

FTFY

Keir Starmer and Labour now need to say what they actually stand for. Frankly, nobody had a clue what Labour’s “change” meant, but people just wanted the Conservatives out.

Reform has a strong identity, reflected in its voter share (14.3%)

Labour needs to start working on who they are

I think what people are mean when they talk about the future tense in English is actually the Aspect.

Still no,  You could be narrowly prescriptive and claim that it doesn’t have a future tense, in comparison to other languages that have “grammatically fixed expressions of futurity” i.e. words or verb forms that are only used in sentences about things that are yet to happen. (J’arai / I will go) where in this case ‘will’ while strictly speaking is modally still present tense, in context; indicates future.

I wonder if this is partly why “Romans go home” is funny to English speakers, or whether it is just because John Cleese is clearly doing an impression of Mr Street, my French teacher?

Reform has a strong identity, reflected in its voter share (14.3%)

Only because they’re still spouting the same extreme-Right crap that Enoch Powell was trotting out fifty years ago, as do all the other reactionary Nationalists around the world, like Mohdi, Netanyahu, Putin, blah, blah, blah.

Still no,  You could be narrowly prescriptive and claim that it doesn’t have a future tense, in comparison to other languages that have “grammatically fixed expressions of futurity” i.e. words or verb forms that are only used in sentences about things that are yet to happen. (J’arai / I will go) where in this case ‘will’ while strictly speaking is modally still present tense, in context; indicates future.

It’s not so much a question of being narrowly prescriptive and more a question of knowing the definition.  From the Collins link I posted above:

In Collins COBUILD English Grammar (2017), tense is defined as ‘… a verb form that indicates a particular point in time or period of time’. And in his study of The English Verb, Lewis, (1986:50), describes tense as involving ‘a morphological change in the base form of the verb. A verb form which is made with an auxiliary is not, in this technical meaning, a “tense”.’

Tense is fairly well defined as acting on the base form of the verb.

It seems that, in the same way the meaning of literally has expanded to include figuratively through constant misuse, the definition of Tense has also expanded to include Aspect.

I accept that people now use figuratively when they mean literally.  Just don’t expect me to do it because everyone else is doing it.

It’s not so much a question of being narrowly prescriptive and more a question of knowing the definition

You’ve quoted, literally*, one person supporting your view. Many others are available. I wonder if you consider “decimate” can only mean a reduction of ten percent? Or do you use the word figuratively**?

*Not figuratively.

**Not literally.

Only because they’re still spouting the same extreme-Right crap that Enoch Powell was trotting out fifty years ago

They really aren’t, the UK has progressed massively since Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech. Today’s UK electorate would not tolerate the crude and openly racist rhetoric that Powell espoused with his talk of repatriation of immigrants from black commonwealth countries etc. Not that it did his political career any favours.

Today Reform UK are far more subtle with their bigotry, they certainly wouldn’t dream of claiming that in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man, as Powell did. And they are perfectly happy to have black candidates standing for them in elections.

Fighting racism and bigotry is a long rocky road but we have come a long way, even if there is still much to do.

You’ve quoted, literally*, one person supporting your view.

True.

Therefore let me suggest you type ‘tense vs aspect English future’ into google and see how many of the resulting links have some variation of the phrase, ‘There is no future tense in English’.

I suggest typing “future tenses in English” into Google because you’ll get a whole lot more results to reputable sites giving good explanations.

Every English as a foreign language textbook I used had chapters on future tenses in English without a mention of aspects.

No point worrying much about grammar anyhow, just imitate. Which is why I know that “je travaille demain” is the best way to communicate the fact I’m working tomorrow.

Therefore let me suggest you type ‘tense vs aspect English future’ into google and see how many of the resulting links have some variation of the phrase, ‘There is no future tense in English’.

As Edukator suggests, I had already typed “future tenses in English” into Google. It’s why I’m confident that you were, are, and will be talking out of your posterior.

I suggest typing “future tenses in English” into Google because you’ll get a whole lot more results to reputable sites giving good explanations.

Every English as a foreign language textbook I used had chapters on future tenses in English without a mention of aspects.

OK, so you’re saying Aspects are something that someone made up as a joke and lots of us fell for it?

Or maybe the issue with Tense is it’s commonly used as a simplification for the Tense-Aspect-Mood grammatical categories.

Given that this all started because someone said to me ‘I hate to tell you but you appear to not understand tenses’ and in my reply I half jokingly made reference to the fact that I actually do kind of understand tenses, hence the reference to the future tense not existing.  Because using the Tense-Aspect-Mood categorisations, it doesn’t (kind of).

Then everyone thought they’d spotted a mistake and, this being STW, it simply had to be pointed out and so we’ve been arguing about it for the last 8 hours or so.

It’s true, jokes aren’t nearly as funny when you have to explain them.

You’ll be on fenderextender and edukators list now, they’ll be thinking about you alot.

You don’t normally feel the need to put words into people’s mouths, Bruce. I said that the text books I used for foreign laguage teaching didn’t mention aspects, no more than that. I’m not denying their existance, you’re the one denying something people are happy and familiar with exists.

To deny the existence of the future tense(s) in English really isn’t mainstream even among English teachers. A key requisit when explaining things is using words your audience understands. Talk about tenses and most of your audience is with you, they can relate to what you’re saying and will probably understand. Talk about moods or aspects and most are thinking about things other than using verbs in appropriate forms.

No news on the fate of the rioters or their puppet masters today ?

Then everyone thought they’d spotted a mistake and, this being STW, it simply had to be pointed out and so we’ve been arguing about it for the last 8 hours or so.

If it bothers you, stop doing it.

To deny the existence of the future tense(s) in English really isn’t mainstream even among English teachers.

I’m sure it isn’t common amongst English teachers.  I used to be one and I never came across it. It was a joke based on a linguist’s definition, ie, someone who studies the structure of languages. So the joke was, someone said, ‘you don’t know what a tense is’ and my reply contained an obscure definition of tense that, while technically correct, is too pedantic for most people to use in everyday conversation.

I assumed at least some people would get it based on the fact STW is supposedly full of highly educated individuals who might know trivia like this but nope, turns out not to be the case.

So, here’s a nerdy video on the subject

And on the subject of race, culture, grammar, and misconceptions

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JDAj9OVooyY&t=610s

Anyway, having had time to trawl through my FB and it seems every one of my leftie friends is complaining that Starmer hasn’t fixed whatever their favourite issue is yet.

It’s directed at Starmer and not the government, and there’s no way they could have got around to even thinking how to fix all these diverse issues in the time they’ve been in power.

Lot’s of impatient folk

What’s that got to do with the recent rioting?

About as much as Future tense.

Has Starmer not found a cure for cancer yet? For gods sake, what’s he been playing at, the centrist bastard!

Anyway.., back on topic, just for the novelty value, watching the news tonight, I’m amazed at the ages of the people being sent down for rioting. They’re not just 18 year old scrotes, who you can sort of understand on a ‘young and stupid’ basis. There’s blokes in their 40’s, 50’s and 60’s. What the hell are you doing with your life if you’re that age and you’re spending your evening chucking bricks at coppers?

Todays Brains of Britain award goes to the bloke who just got sent down for 3 years. He’d been identified as his name was emblazoned on the back of his t-shirt in the video of him launching bricks at the police.

The news didn’t specify whether he was angry because an immigrant had taken his job as a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist but I’m sure it’ll have been one of the two

You’ll be on fenderextender and edukators list now, they’ll be thinking about you alot.

Who are you, again?

FWIW, I caught tenburner in a direct lie, contradicting himself because he was making stuff up. This upset him.

@tenburner – do you want me to bring the whole thing back to life for those who weren’t around at the time?

Just say the word if you’re keen.

There has been some very bizarre behaviour by people with “genuine concerns” about immigration :

Another man, Bradley McCarthy, 34, of Knowle West, was also sentenced on Tuesday to 20 months in prison for being “racist and abusive” towards protesters and shouting in a police dog’s face.

I am not sure what he was shouting but surely the poor dog couldn’t be held responsible for the current levels of immigration?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgrwe361l1o

I am not sure what he was shouting but surely the poor dog couldn’t be held responsible for the current levels of immigration?

German Shepherd? Pekingese? Afghan Hound? Dalmatian? Pomeranian?

They come over hear, piss up are lampposts, sniff are bulldogs’ arses.

Etc.

The ol’ Pekingese police dogs eh?

Edit : What cracked me up was that he wasn’t just shouting at the police dog, he was shouting “in a police dog’s face”

Which TBF takes some guts. Or stupidity.

Mind you not so much if it was a Pekingese

It was a joke

I didn’t know that you live in Edinburgh.

I didn’t know that you live in Edinburgh.

Just to be clear, you’re saying that I was genuinely trying to say English language speakers have no way of conveying the idea of things happening in the future?

It was a pedantic joke. It was a shit joke.  But honestly, after I’ve taken you through all the steps of how it was constructed (you don’t know tenses, hah, here’s a pedantic definition of tense) and the background definitions on how it’s technically correct from a linguistic point of view, you’ve still come to the conclusion that it was a serious observation that the future might as well be mythical land for English speakers?

In future I will bear in mind you need jokes aimed at you to be a bit more obvious.

Another rioter that went down today was identified by…. having his name emblazoned on the back of his T shirt.

It didn’t say but id love to think he wore a mask/balaclava to add to the utter stupidity exhibited! Epic. :D

What cracked me up was that he wasn’t just shouting at the police dog, he was shouting “in a police dog’s face”

Which TBF takes some guts. Or stupidity.

Mind you not so much if it was a Pekingese

The things some people will stoop to…

Another rioter that went down today was identified by…. having his name emblazoned on the back of his T shirt.

It didn’t say but id love to think he wore a mask/balaclava to add to the utter stupidity exhibited! Epic. :D

Probably stumbled into police having tried, unsuccessfully, to wear a balaclava – but put it on back-to-front.

Edit: Semi-serious question – with reference to the above – at what point is it OK to tell someone they are literally useless?

Just to be clear, you’re saying that I was genuinely trying to say English language speakers have no way of conveying the idea of things happening in the future?

No. I have no idea why you would think that people can’t talk about the future if they don’t have a future tense in their language, other than a lack of imagination.

In future I will bear in mind you need jokes aimed at you to be a bit more obvious.

Emojis would help me to tell when you’re trying to be funny.