Timeline Photos

Katherine Hrisonopulo

It is interesting how far this sentence could go in terms of aspectual modifications. Though indeed many grammars state that "think" in the meaning of "believe" or "consider" is seldom/never used in the Continuous, somehow it seems that four combinations are possible:

(1) I think I think too much;
(2) I think I am thinking too much;
(3) I am thinking I think too much;
(4) I am thinking I am thinking too much [???]

I'm wondering whether my supposition is correct

Timeline Photos

By: English is Fun

Начало формы

Like · · Unfollow Post · Share · April 19 at 9:54pm

o

o

Dai Hawkins I don't like (3) and (4). They strike me as possible but only in very limited contexts (and no, I don't want to give examples).

April 19 at 10:10pm · Unlike · 1

o

Stuart Duncan "I am thinking to myself that I am thinking too much about this problem."

All four of them seem fine to me, and I don't see them as that limited.

April 20 at 3:11am · Unlike · 2

o

Dai Hawkins It's the two present tenses that interest me:
"I live in Lowestoft"
"I am living in Lowestoft"
I've recently noticed a tendency for some Americans to mix up these two tenses, presumably through interference from their or their parents' native languages, which do not have this distinction.

April 20 at 4:07am · Unlike · 1

o

Vivienne Jenkins If MacDonalds can say, " I'm loving it.........

April 25 at 4:45pm · Like

o

Simon Evans I live, I´m living is a common exception to the temporary/permananent distinction for the use of present simple v. continuous tense. They both mean exactly the same thing in spoken English around the world, at least as far as I know. Work/working is also going the same way.

Yesterday at 7:52pm · Like

o

Dai Hawkins Don't agree. that am living/live *is* an exception to the rule, except among the millions of people who speak English more or less directly translated from their mother tongues.

Yesterday at 7:54pm · Like

o

Stuart Duncan I'd say they don't mean the same thing in Australia or New Zealand.

Yesterday at 7:58pm · Like

o

Simon Evans well, I´ve even seen this in English language textbooks, not that I can remember which, though.

Yesterday at 7:59pm · Edited · Like

o

Stuart Duncan They don't mean the same to me or those people I know. And, I'm sorry, but I am not worried about it having been in a language textbook. It isn't in any of the textbooks I've got.

Yesterday at 8:01pm · Like

o

Dai Hawkins @ simon. Your language textbooks are not describing contemporary English as spoken by native-speakers.

Yesterday at 8:02pm · Like

o

Stuart Duncan It's true that someone might say either: "I live in a villa in Wellington", or "I am living in a villa in Wellington", but few people would say: "I live in a motel", when it is only temporary.

Yesterday at 8:08pm · Like · 1

o

Dai Hawkins "I live in a flat."
"I'm living in a flat."
The meanings of these two statements overlap, but there is absolutely no doubt that the second demands temporality.

Yesterday at 8:15pm · Like

o

Stuart Duncan Take these two:
1. I am living in a caravan while my house gets fixed.
2. I live in a caravan while my house gets fixed.

It is hard to imagine a native speaker using the second.

However, Dai, I believe there are circumstances where either could be used and this is where Simon gets his idea from. Someone saying: "I'm living in a flat", may be there permanently, but are indicating (to my mind) that they hope, whether it is likely or not, to eventually go up in the world. And since all residence on this earth is temporary, the continuous can be used for permanent residence. But there is still a distinction between the two forms that is essential in some contexts.

Yesterday at 8:23pm · Unlike · 2

o

Dai Hawkins Absolutely! Wish I'd thought of saying it like that.

Yesterday at 8:25pm · Like

o

Ron Sharp What is a caravan?

Yesterday at 9:54pm · Like

o

Stuart Duncan A mobile home dragged behind a car.

http://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumerprotection/Images/Motor_vehicles/caravan.jpg