Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 20/09/2005 12:52, Ken Penner wrote:

> Peter wrote:
>
>  
>
> > "Would" NEVER indicates future tense and never has done. This is a 
> > mother tongue speaker telling you that, with support from 
> > several other 
> > mother tongue speakers on this list, as well as from reference books. 
> >    
>
> I think this is stated a bit too strongly. "Would" is considered "posterior
> past" by Hans Reichenbach (Elements of Symbolic Logic, 297), the very man
> responsible for the event model constituted by speech time (S), reference
> time (R), and event time (E). Reichenbach's "posterior" is now generally
> called "relative future tense," in which R precedes E.
> "For the posterior past R-E-S the form 'he would do' is used, for instance
> in 'I did not expect that he would win the race'" (297). Reichenbach also
> gives "he was going to" as a substitute for this use of "would" (298).
>  

It may be a "relative future tense", but that is not the same thing as 
the future tense which Vadim keeps going on about.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.3/106 - Release Date: 19/09/2005