Hey, I scanned through the search engine to see if this topic existed anywhere, but I didn't find it (after a quick search). We learned about the use of progressive and simple forms in school and ever since I find myself in doubt when I have to use a tense! Basically we learned about aspectuality; foreground actions are to be in simple tense and background/general actions in progressive (or simple) tense. In creative writing I'm aware that grammatical lines can be somewhat blurred, but is there like a general rule which tense is more approppriate for what? Example: He was standing/stood on the rail, focusing on his sommersault.
I'm confused by your example. Could you offer a different one or, ideally, three or four different ones?
From the one example you gave, it sounds like you're asking about tense. If your piece is written in past tense, which it should be, because present tense is objectively terrible, it should be "He stood on the rail, focusing on his sommersault." If you're writing in present tense just to make me unbelievably furious, it would be "He was standing on the rail, focusing on his sommersault." And thats the end of my opinions!
What a ridiculous comment. Any tense is fine. And what's more you're incorrect. The OP's example written in present tense would be: He's standing on the rail, focusing on his sommersault. How can your example be present tense when you've used the word 'was' to describe what someone is doing? 'Standing' may, strictly speaking, be present tense, but its use in past tense, such as in 'He was standing' is not uncommon. But back to the main question. I'm also a little confused by it, but think I might know what's being asked. I think @Poziga's confusion comes with the two seemingly different use of tense in the example sentence; those being 'stood' and 'focusing'. I'm not sure 'focusing' is strict present tense, but it does kind of put the action in the 'now'. The alternative would be: "He was stood on the rail, focused on his sommersault." but this sounds clumsy to me. "He was stood on the rail, focusing on his sommersault." reads just fine to me and I wouldn't give it a moment's thought if I read it in a narrative, unlike the alternative.
My confusion was about the somersault. Is the somersault something that he's planning to do, or something that someone else is doing? I'm going to treat it as if it's He was standing/stood on the rail, focusing on the birds in the tree. I believe that the following are correct. Simple past: He stood on the rail and focused on the birds in the tree. To me, this would indicate a complete action--he got himself up on the rail, focused on the birds, and...I'd be waiting for the next action to come right up. Past continuous: He was standing on the rail, focusing on the birds in the tree. This, on the other hand, could last for a while. He could be doing that while two other characters, say, have a fist fight. Simple present: He stands on the rail and focuses on the birds in the tree. However, I see a warning that this is not intended for actual current events, but instead for repeated or habitual actions. As in, "Every Tuesday morning, he stands on the rail and focuses on the birds in the tree." Hmm. Do all those present tense novels adhere to this? I think not? If so, then there'd be no way to do the equivalent of the simple past example in a present tense novel. Present continuous: He is standing on the rail, focusing on the birds in the tree. The same as past continuous above, just moved from a past tense narrative to a present tense narrative. I think that fairly frequently, the simple past and the past continuous could be substituted for one another, and the meaning would be so subtly changed that it wouldn't really matter.
Yeah, that's what you get for opening a thread right before bedtime, sorry for being unclear. The problem is not the relationship between the two verbs in the example I gave, but only in the first verb. The example I provided was the protagonist standing on the rail of a trawler, focusing on doing a sommersault (that he will do). The problem is with the first verb -> He stood on the rail (, focusing on doing a sommersault) vs. He was standing on the rail (, focusing on doing a somersault). I don't understand if there is a deeper semantic difference in using past simple or past continuous. I must admit though, that the second example sounds a bit strange, having two -ing forms with different functions. Maybe a couple more example, hope they are adeuqate, given there is no context. - She danced like a fairy vs. She was dancing like a fairy. - Then, I got lost. I was wandering around (vs. I wandered around) for a while and ended up at the station where I stepped out. Longer example: - A mile from shore a fishing boat was fishing with the remains of fishes and a call to a 'Breakfast Meeting' was floating in the air, until the multitude of a thousand seagulls was gathered. They were gliding hither and thither, fighting for the pieces of food. Another working day was beginning. Could the bold examples in the above text be past simple (except for was fishing, fished soudns strange)? A call to a Breakfast Meeting floated in the air... They glided hither and thither... Another working day began (this one I think I understand. was beginning puts you in a scene where people are getting up, began puts you in a scene where everybody is alredy working). I hope I was clearer now.
The decision for all of them depends on context, IMO. "She danced like a fairy" could mean that this represents an event that started and finished: She served us all tuna fish sandwiches. She danced like a fairy on the back deck. Then she urged us all inside to watch the election returns. It could also be descriptive: She was the love of my life, and I never forgot her. Her hair was black and wild. Her voice was like running water. She danced like a fairy. She walked like a queen. She argued like a senator. On the other hand, "She was dancing like a fairy" is a continuous action that, usually, goes on while something else is happening. She was dancing like a fairy. He ignored her and ate his soup. Simple past--I wandered. Because this was an action that finished and you went on to something else. The other would, again, be a continuous action while something else is happening: I was wandering around the forest when the explosion happened. I'm confused about "fishing with the remains of fishes." I'm going to tweak it to be something that I understand. I would rewrite this as follows: Past continuous: A mile from shore, a fishing boat was pursuing the remains of the salmon run, and a call to "Breakfast Meeting!" was floating in the air, as a multitude of seagulls was gathering. They were gliding hither and thither, fighting for pieces of food. Another working day was beginning. Simple past: A mile from shore, a fishing boat pursued the remains of the salmon run. A call to "Breakfast Meeting!" cut through the air. A multitude of seagulls gathered. They glided hither and thither and fought for pieces of food. Another working day had begun.
I don't mean to be a grammar nazi here, but it's "somersault". Sorry, it was bugging me. It's like chumming for sharks - you dump fish parts overboard and catch whatever comes to feed. At least, that's what I'm getting from it. I'm not a fisherman. There's no reason you can't combine them. Something like this: A mile from shore, a fishing boat pursued the remains of the salmon run. A call to "Breakfast Meeting!" cut through the air. A multitude of seagulls gathered, gliding hither and thither as they fought for pieces of food. Another working day was beginning.
