Grammar usage
Posted: 28 June 2017 09:23 PM   [ Ignore ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  708
Joined  2013-10-14

I can’t seem to find the English tenses of these sentences. They’re in a book I’m reading, which was published in 1926.

She had scarcely time to assemble her feelings about this before he was arrived.

They were come out to seize on her soul.

The grammar seems a little stilted, or perhaps an obsolete usage.

Bold emphasis mine.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2017 05:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6265
Joined  2007-01-03

The grammar seems a little stilted, or perhaps an obsolete usage.

Exactly. In the first example, arrive is being used transitively and passively. The transitive arrive is obsolescent, having its heyday (I think) in the eighteenth century.

The were come out construction is found several times in the King James Bible, as in Mark 6:54, “And when they were come out of the ship, straightway they knew him.” (The corresponding verse Matthew 14:34 has, “And when they were gone over, they came into the land of Gennesaret.") The best way to analyze this one is, perhaps, to think of come out as an adjectival phrase describing a state, rather than a verb phrase.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2017 07:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  708
Joined  2013-10-14

Exactly. In the first example, arrive is being used transitively and passively. The transitive arrive is obsolescent, having its heyday (I think) in the eighteenth century.

The were come out construction is found several times in the King James Bible, as in Mark 6:54, “And when they were come out of the ship, straightway they knew him.” (The corresponding verse Matthew 14:34 has, “And when they were gone over, they came into the land of Gennesaret.") The best way to analyze this one is, perhaps, to think of come out as an adjectival phrase describing a state, rather than a verb phrase.

Thank you for the explanation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2017 08:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  285
Joined  2007-02-15

Dave, can you explain more precisely why the first usage is transotive? Even passively, I am struggling to see an object for ‘arrived’?

To me it seems more a case of a verb of motion in the present perfect with ‘be’ rather than ‘have’ as its auxiliary verb before the past participle? This is still common in many IE languages and was also more common in older English. Apologies if I have misinterpreted this.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 June 2017 12:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6265
Joined  2007-01-03
BlackGrey - 29 June 2017 08:31 AM

Dave, can you explain more precisely why the first usage is transotive? Even passively, I am struggling to see an object for ‘arrived’?

To me it seems more a case of a verb of motion in the present perfect with ‘be’ rather than ‘have’ as its auxiliary verb before the past participle? This is still common in many IE languages and was also more common in older English. Apologies if I have misinterpreted this.

You’re right. That’s a simpler explanation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 June 2017 09:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  708
Joined  2013-10-14

To me it seems more a case of a verb of motion in the present perfect with ‘be’ rather than ‘have’ as its auxiliary verb before the past participle?

I don’t understand that explanation, please elaborate.

“She had scarcely time to assemble her feelings about this before he was arrived.”

In the book she is informed that her nephew is coming to live in her town. Therefore, I read this as; she had just assembled her feelings just before his arrival.
The present perfect tense deals with an action that began in the past and continues up to the present time. This would not be the case in the sentence from the book.

The past perfect tense deals with an action that was completed in the past before a more recent past-time action took place.
Therefore, the character in the book had, (past perfect tense) scarcely time to assemble her feelings before he had arrived.

Am I wrong?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 June 2017 05:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  285
Joined  2007-02-15

No, but that´s not really the issue here.

Verbs lilke ´come´ and ´go´ used to be conjugated with ´be´ rather than ´have´ in the ´perfect´ tense forms. So:

OE (putative): I am come to save him
Modern: I have come to save him

OE (putative): I was come to save him
Modern: I had come to save him

That’s as plain as I can say it I think?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 June 2017 08:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  708
Joined  2013-10-14
BlackGrey - 30 June 2017 05:13 PM

No, but that´s not really the issue here.

Verbs lilke ´come´ and ´go´ used to be conjugated with ´be´ rather than ´have´ in the ´perfect´ tense forms. So:

OE (putative): I am come to save him
Modern: I have come to save him

OE (putative): I was come to save him
Modern: I had come to save him

That’s as plain as I can say it I think?

I appreciate the explanation, thank you. Who said grammar was easy?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 July 2017 07:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3449
Joined  2007-01-31

I remember on the old board, or perhaps even the board before that, we discussed this in the context of the Christmas carol, “Joy to the World,” of which the second line is, “the Lord is come.”

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
‹‹ HD: Emojis and the Law      BL: laneway ››