I wrote a book as she cooked.

[BestBuddy]

Our teachers keep telling us that with "as"(with meaning at the same time) we have to use the countinuous form (because it's a process as they say).
Is it always true? Can we use the past continuous and the past simple interchangeably (for things happening at the same time)?

1. As I was walking home, I was listening to music.
2. As I walked home, I listened to music.
   
   
3. As I was walking along the street, I was looking in the store windows.
4. As I walked along the street, I looked in the store windows.
   
   
5. I was writing a book as she was cooking.
6. I wrote a book as she cooked.

 

[Glizdka]

"As I walk through the valley of the shadow of grammar, I shall fear no tense for my teacher is with me."

You can, in fact, use non-continuous tenses with as. Teachers tend to tell their students they can't do something when it's incorrect only most of the time, not always. However, It doesn't mean the past continuous and the past simple can be used interchangeably.

The general rule in language is that different grammatical structures are used in different contexts and to express—sometimes only slightly—different ideas.

Why do you want to use non-continuous tenses with as? What do you think changes when you do that?

 

[BestBuddy]

Why do you want to use non-continuous tenses with as? What do you think changes when you do that?

In grammar books I often see the simple past used with 'as' in both clauses. I'm afraid if I say "I built a ship as she cooked dinner" it implies completion of the ship since I use the simple form, so I asked my teacher about that and she said that I should avoid using the past simple so that I wouldn't mislead anyone about the completion of the object (ship/book/anything).

 

[jutfrank]

To answer your questions: no and no.

Teachers are not so much interested in being precise about what is or isn't absolutely true. They're there to give you the most useful information that will help you use the language better than you already do.

 

[Glizdka]

Teachers are not so much interested in being precise about what is or isn't absolutely true. They're there to give you the most useful information that will help you use the language better than you already do.

Got to write it down.

 

[Glizdka]

In grammar books I often see the simple past used with 'as' in both clauses.

That is because there's nothing wrong with using the past simple with as in both clauses. Mind you that using the past simple instead of the past continuous changes what the sentence communicates.

I'm afraid if I say "I built a ship as she cooked dinner" it implies completion of the ship since I use the simple form.

I can't imagine this situation at all. What are you trying to say here? Are you trying to say that you built an entire ship from start to finish all by yourself? Are you trying to say that you were at some stage of the process of building a ship while she was cooking dinner? Is this maybe some habit you had in the past—you and she did your respective activities at the same time on more than one occasion?

What do she and her cooking dinner have to do with all of it? Do you want to communicate that the two things happened simultaneously? Do you want to use her cooking dinner as a time unit to give the reader an idea of how long it took you to build the ship? Do you want to say that you and she finished your respective activities at the same time, but it was a coincidence? Or maybe you agreed that you would build a ship and she would cook dinner, as a form of delegating your duties?

I have no idea what you're trying to say. As it stands, the sentence is meaningless to me. Try a new sentence, a real-life example of something that the reader is actually likely to have encountered and able to imagine.

The problem with the six sentences you gave in the original post, as well as the seventh one I've just quoted, is that they're isolated sentences, devoid of context, and it's difficult to tell if what you're saying is what you intended to say. With enough context, you can justify saying just about anything. I can imagine something while reading these sentences, but is this the same thing you imagined when you wrote them? The only way we can be sure is if you add some context, perhaps a background story that would introduce the circumstances in which these words were said. Then, we can be sure of what's going on and tell if a particular sentence makes sense in that situation.

I asked my teacher about that and she said that I should avoid using the past simple so that I wouldn't mislead anyone about the completion of the object (ship/book/anything).

I'd say the past simple and the past continuous do their usual thing in sentences with as. Time clauses aside, do you know when using the past simple is appropriate? Do you know when using the past continuous is appropriate? The past simple can suggest that an activity was completed, but it can also suggest that an activity occurred habitually in the past on more than one occasion. There's also stative verbs that don't go well with the continuous aspect, regardless of any notion of completion.

I think your teacher is trying to make you focus on the material you're supposed to be studying, and she's simply telling you not to get distracted with other possible uses of as in time clauses.

 

[emsr2d2]

If you started building a ship while she cooked dinner: I started building a ship ...
If you had already started and continued with building it: I carried on/continued building a ship ...
If you had started it already but finished it while she cooked dinner: I finished building a ship ...

If you started it and completed it while she cooked dinner: I built a ship ...

 

[BestBuddy]

If you started building a ship while she cooked dinner: I started building a ship ...
If you had already started and continued with building it: I carried on/continued building a ship ...
If you had started it already but finished it while she cooked dinner: I finished building a ship ...

If you started it and completed it while she cooked dinner: I built a ship ...

Thanks. It clears up. If I just did a session of building I have to say, "I carried on/continued". Would this work as well? "I spent some time building/painting/repairing (something) while/as she watched TV."
Context: I started repairing my truck two days ago, it's a long process so it'll be ready only in several days. My friend asks me, "What did your wife do yesterday evening?", I say "Nothing special, she cooked dinner (or anything).", then he asks, "What did you do while she cooked?", "I (repaired/spent some time repairing/...) my truck while she cooked dinner."

I have no idea what you're trying to say. As it stands, the sentence is meaningless to me. Try a new sentence, a real-life example of something that the reader is actually likely to have encountered and able to imagine.

The problem with the six sentences you gave in the original post, as well as the seventh one I've just quoted, is that they're isolated sentences, devoid of context, and it's difficult to tell if what you're saying is what you intended to say. With enough context, you can justify saying just about anything.

I've noticed that some people often ask for context, but the problem is when you study grammar books they don't provide context, they just show sentences without any context especially when they teach grammar rules.

I'd like to explain my problem so that everybody will understand my issue and be able to help.
I speak a language that have many verbs form for any verb. The most important verb forms are perfect and imperfect ones. We use the perfect form of the verb only when we know 100% that the action/object was/is/will be completed, and if we're not sure, we use the imperfect form of the verb. I don't think that for all Ukrainians/Russians it's a problem. They just don't bother. They just use the past/future simple all the time even when the object wasn't finished, because many teachers in our countries say that English doesn't separate whether the object is/was/will be complete or not. But I wanted to know the true English (not just spam the past simple all the time), so I asked some natives about that, and they say the past simple does mean completion.

I'm still trying to learn the true English, but I'm feeling like I'm giving up. Especially after seeing in English Grammar in Use sentences like, "Alex read a book while Amy watched TV." As you can see Murphy used the simple past with while and I don't think he said about the whole book.

That's why I asked about these two:

1. I was writing a book as/while she was cooking.
2. I wrote a book as/while she cooked.

and so on with verbs such as; to write a book, to build a ship, to knit a sweater, etc, etc.

(If I have made minor errors in punctuation or something, please don't correct them, as it may shift the focus from the main to the secondary.)

 

[emsr2d2]

Thanks. It clears it up. If I just did a session of building I have to say, "I carried on/continued". Would this work as well? "I spent some time building/painting/repairing (something) while/as she watched TV."

Yes, you can say that.

I've noticed that some people often ask for context, but the problem is when you study grammar books they don't provide context, they just show sentences without any context especially when they teach grammar rules.

Of course they don't. If grammar books provided every possible context for every word, phrase or grammar point in English, the books would be the size of a small country!

I'd like to explain my problem so that everybody will understand my issue and be able to help.
I speak a language that have many verbs form for any verb. The most important verb forms are perfect and imperfect ones. We use the perfect form of the verb only when we know 100% that the action/object was/is/will be completed, and if we're not sure, we use the imperfect form of the verb.

Forget about the rules of your own language and just learn the rules of English.

I don't think that for all Ukrainians/Russians it's a problem. They just don't bother. They just use the past/future simple all the time even when the object wasn't finished, because many teachers in our countries say that English doesn't separate whether the object is/was/will be complete or not.

You're not other people.

But I wanted want to know the true real English (not just spam use the past simple all the time), so I asked some natives native speakers about that no comma here and they say the past simple does mean completion.

I'm still trying to learn the true real English, but I'm feeling I feel like I'm giving up, especially after seeing in English Grammar in Use sentences like no comma here "Alex read a book while Amy watched TV." As you can see, Murphy used the simple past with "while" and I don't think he said was talking about reading the whole book.

"read a book" (present simple or past simple) means more than one thing. It means "read some of a book" and "read all of a book". Context tells you what is meant. You also have to use logic. How long does it take to read a whole book? Two or three days minimum for most of us. How long do people usually watch TV for? Maybe four or five hours. What is the probability that he read an entire book in the same length of time that she was watching TV?

Bear in mind, too, that "read" can be both transitive and intransitive.

What did you do while Amy cooked dinner?
I read. (We know the duration but we don't know what you read or how much of whatever it was you read.)

What did you do while Amy cooked dinner?
I read a book. (We know the duration and we know what you read but we don't know how much of it you read.)

That's why I asked about these two:

1. I was writing a book as/while she was cooking.
2. I wrote a book as/while she cooked.

and so on with verbs such as; to write a book, to build a ship, to knit a sweater, etc, etc.

Sometimes, two different verb forms are possible and correct!

(If I have made minor errors in punctuation or something, please don't correct them, as it may shift the focus from the main to the secondary.)

Nope! Sorry. I correct all errors, whether you like it or not.

I don't think this thread is going anywhere. My suggestion is that you read more good English texts, and watch TV and movies in English, instead of concentrating on grammar books. If you want to learn real everyday English, that's how you'll do it.

 

[BestBuddy]

I tried to make myself understood, but understading is a matter of everyone involved in conversation. So the attempt failed. Frankly, I'm surprised that some people don't even try to understand others.

You said about using logic.

You also have to use logic. How long does it take to read a whole book? Two or three days minimum for most of us. How long do people usually watch TV for? Maybe four or five hours. What is the probability that he read an entire book in the same length of time that she was watching TV?

So my logic tells me that if I say "Alex built a ship while Amy watched TV", the sentence doesn't tell us about the completion of the ship. Is it logic? Yes, it is.

The same with:
Alex read a book while Amy watched TV.
Alex wrote a book while Amy watched TV.
Alex knitted a sweater while Amy watched TV.
Alex repaired his truck while Amy watched TV.
etc.

I used logic here, just as you asked me to.

You also have to use logic. What is the probability that he read an entire book in the same length of time that she was watching TV?

 

[5jj]

(If I have made minor errors in punctuation or something, please don't correct them, as it may shift the focus from the main to the secondary.)

We have told you more than once before that it is our policy here to correct all the mistakes we spot. Some readers might believe that errors we do not correct are not errors.

Please stop asking us not to do what we have told you clearly that we will do.

 

[probus]

Also, @BestBuddy I advise you to stop debating with us. You are here to learn and we are here as volunteer teachers to help you with that, not to argue with you.

 

[BestBuddy]

Also, @BestBuddy I advise you to stop debating with us. You are here to learn and we are here as volunteer teachers to help you with that, not to argue with you.

I'm not trying to debate with anyone. I'm trying to understand real English. As I've already said, many people just spam/use past simple with incompleted actions, but my goal is to know real English, that's why I'm here. I tried many times to make myself understood, but since understading is a matter of everyone involved in conversation, the attempts failed.

we have told you more than once before that it is our policy here to correct all the mistakes we spot. Some readers might believe that errors we do not correct are not errors.

Please stop asking us not to do what we have told you clearly that we will so.

But you haven't corrected these:

My logic tells me that if I say "Alex built a ship while Amy watched TV", the sentence doesn't tell us about the completion of the ship. Is it logic? Yes, it is.

The same with:
1) Alex read a book while Amy watched TV.
2) Alex wrote a book while Amy watched TV.
3) Alex knitted a sweater while Amy watched TV.
4) Alex repaired his truck while Amy watched TV.
etc.

Nobody seems to have said anything about this. So it's not a mistake, right?

Alex didn't complete 1) reading the book, 2) writing the book, 3) knitting the sweater, 4) repairing his truck because all those actions take much more time than just a session of Amy's watching TV.

 

[emsr2d2]

Alex didn't complete 1) reading the book, 2) writing the book, 3) knitting the sweater, 4) repairing his truck because all those actions take much more time than just a session of Amy's watching TV.

Logic tells us that Alex probably didn't complete any of them due to the timescale. The use of the present simple doesn't tell us whether he/she completed them.

This will be my last response in this thread. I stick with my suggestion that the best way for you to learn how to use tenses like a native speaker is to read and listen to good, reliable English, from native speakers.

 

[5jj]

the best way for you to learn how to use tenses like a native speaker is to read and listen to good, reliable English, from native speakers.

And try to accept, BestBuddy:

implications such as duration, completion, repetition, emotional overtones. etc. are never conveyed in English by tense or aspect alone;

immediate and less close context and co-text are always important in working out the 'meaning' of an utterance;

grammar alone is not sufficient. The differences in implications between any tense or aspect of the verbs in READ a book and WRITE a book cannot be completely understood without recognising the fundamental differences inherently felt by native speakers between reading and writing a book;

People have been studying the grammar of their own and other languages for at least 2,500 years. They have been studying the grammar of English for at least 450 years. We still cannot say for unscripted spoken utterances what precisely was going on in a speaker's mind at the moment of unconscious selection of a tense or aspect.

 

[Skrej]

"read a book" (present simple or past simple) means more than one thing. It means "read some of a book" and "read all of a book". Context tells you what is meant. You also have to use logic. How long does it take to read a whole book? Two or three days minimum for most of us. How long do people usually watch TV for? Maybe four or five hours. What is the probability that he read an entire book in the same length of time that she was watching TV?

The length of the book also comes into play, as well as how fast he reads and of course how long she watched TV. It's unrealistic that he read "War and Peace" from start to finish while she watched "The Last of the Mohicans", but it's quite feasible to read the "The Cat in the Hat" while she watched an 30 minute episode of "Mrs. Brown's Boys".

We get none of those details from the verb by itself.

 

[Glizdka]

BestBuddy, you're going to have to accept that the answers you get aren't always the answers you wanted; they might turn out to be the answers you need.

If you want to learn a language, you have to use it. Doing exercises can help you get a picture of what's right and wrong, but it's not algebra where you solve for x and check the answer sheet to see if it's correct. Language is personal, creative, and idiosyncratic. That's why we have poets, comedians, and demagogs.

If you want to learn real English, I suggest you start paying attention to how speakers of English put their thoughts into words and try to copy them next time you want to express a similar idea yourself. Your ability to create your own ways to put thoughts into words gets better as your knowledge of English increases.

Don't get angry at teachers and textbook designers too much. It's difficult to design an exercise where only one answer is possible. Try to focus on what's correct, not what's incorrect.

 

[BestBuddy]

So my logic tells me that if I say "Alex built a ship while Amy watched TV", the sentence doesn't tell us about the completion of the ship.

The same with:
Alex read a book while Amy watched TV.
Alex built a ship while Amy watched TV.
Alex repaired his truck while Amy watched TV.
etc.
None was complete.

Now you're saying it's correct to use the past simple with incomplete actions/objects.

Logic tells us that Alex probably didn't complete any of them due to the timescale.

But earlier you were saying that it was incorrect.

If you started it and completed it while she cooked dinner: I built a ship ...

If it's now not repaired, he didn't repair it at all. He tried to repair it.

These are two opposing statements whether we like it or not.

 

[jutfrank]

Now you're saying it's correct to use the past simple with incomplete actions/objects.

Yes, it is.

As far as I can tell, you're simply asking whether a past simple clause necessarily expresses a completed action. No, it doesn't. The following sentence could mean both that Alex completed the whole action and it could mean he read just a few pages:

Alex read a book while Amy watched TV.

In other words, both telic and atelic interpretations of the verb phrase are possible. Earlier in the thread, I think you misunderstood emsr2d2's use of the word 'logic'. What she meant to say was that common sense (logic is something quite different) tells us that it's unlikely that someone can read an entire book in the same space of time someone typically spends watching TV. So the disambiguation comes from our experience of people's behaviour.

I'm afraid if I say "I built a ship as she cooked dinner" it implies completion of the ship since I use the simple form, so I asked my teacher about that and she said that I should avoid using the past simple so that I wouldn't mislead anyone about the completion of the object (ship/book/anything).

This wasn't good advice from your teacher, because first, you will very rarely be misleading anyone, and second, if you change the aspect, you change the very meaning of the sentence.

I hate to complicate things more at this point but there is a difference in meaning and use between while and as, but that should be for a separate thread.

 

[Glizdka]

I'm not trying to debate with anyone.

I have a hard time believing that.