4 ms·

go = infinitive going = present gone = preterite No future tense there. You're using "will" as an auxiliary verb to talk about the future. It accomplishes t

by wl 4y ago

go = infinitive going = present gone = preterite No future tense there. You're using "will" as an auxiliary verb to talk about the future. It accomplishes the same thing as a present tense, but it is not the same thing.

inkyoto 4y ago
> going = present > gone = preterite «going» is not «present», and «gone» is not «preterite». They are present and past participles, respectively, that can be used to form present and past tenses in English, and they can be both used as adjectives which signifies the fact that they are the true participles. Present and past participles are a common distinctive feature of Indo-European languages, and their use to form specific aspects of the present and past tenses in English is a common feature across Germanic languages.
- wl 4y ago
  3/4 examples given were participles, so that's what I dealt with. The fact remains there's no future participles in English.
  - inkyoto 4y ago
    Ah, yes, you are correct. I got temporarily transfixed on something else. None of the Indo-European languages (to the best of my knowledge) have future participles due to none of them having a true morphological future tense. Therefore, there future participles are not possible. Future tense, depending on the exact language, is expressed in Indo-European languages either with the use of an auxiliary or a modal verb or with the use of a perfective aspect of the present tense. Esperanto is the only language that does have the future participles, but that is another bedtime story.
- kergonath 4y ago
  > Present and past participles are a common distinctive feature of Indo-European languages, and their use to form specific aspects of the present and past tenses in English is a common feature across Germanic languages. They are used in Romance languages as well. Half the tenses in French are auxiliary+participle combinations (Latin even has future participles).

by wl 4y ago

inkyoto 4y ago

> going = present > gone = preterite «going» is not «present», and «gone» is not «preterite». They are present and past participles, respectively, that can be used to form present and past tenses in English, and they can be both used as adjectives which signifies the fact that they are the true participles. Present and past participles are a common distinctive feature of Indo-European languages, and their use to form specific aspects of the present and past tenses in English is a common feature across Germanic languages.

wl 4y ago
3/4 examples given were participles, so that's what I dealt with. The fact remains there's no future participles in English.
- inkyoto 4y ago
  Ah, yes, you are correct. I got temporarily transfixed on something else. None of the Indo-European languages (to the best of my knowledge) have future participles due to none of them having a true morphological future tense. Therefore, there future participles are not possible. Future tense, depending on the exact language, is expressed in Indo-European languages either with the use of an auxiliary or a modal verb or with the use of a perfective aspect of the present tense. Esperanto is the only language that does have the future participles, but that is another bedtime story.
kergonath 4y ago
> Present and past participles are a common distinctive feature of Indo-European languages, and their use to form specific aspects of the present and past tenses in English is a common feature across Germanic languages. They are used in Romance languages as well. Half the tenses in French are auxiliary+participle combinations (Latin even has future participles).