is held/is being held

[joham]

The 2012 Olympic Games (is/are held, is/are being held, will be held) in London.

Are all the the verb forms in the brackets correct for this sentence?

Thank you in advance.

 

[emsr2d2]

The 2012 Olympic Games (is/are held, is/are being held, will be held) in London.

Are all the the verb forms in the brackets correct for this sentence?

Thank you in advance.

The Olympic Games = plural. Consequently, "is" would be incorrect in every case. "Are held" is wrong because it's the present tense and 2012 is in the future.

The 2012 Olympic Games will be held in London - correct (future tense).
The 2012 Olympic Games are being held in London - correct (present continuous as the future).

 

[euncu]

The Olympic Games = plural. Consequently, "is" would be incorrect in every case. "Are held" is wrong because it's the present tense and 2012 is in the future.

1)The 2012 Olympic Games will be held in London - correct (future tense).
2)The 2012 Olympic Games are being held in London - correct (present continuous as the future).

I'm having some difficulties to understand the tense usage in the second sentence. If it (the Games) was an oncoming event, let's say, will be held at the end of the month or in two weeks or something like that, it wouldn't be a problem for me to understand. But for a something that will take place 2 years later it sounds a bit odd to me (by the way, I'm fully aware that you are a native-speaker and I'm not). I'd be happy if you (or any others who are willing to participate in) help me out to get a better understanding of this tense. How near should something take place for the appropriate usage of this tense (if there is such a criteria)?

Thank you in advance.

 

[emsr2d2]

I'm having some difficulties to understand the tense usage in the second sentence. If it (the Games) was an oncoming event, let's say, will be held at the end of the month or in two weeks or something like that, it wouldn't be a problem for me to understand. But for a something that will take place 2 years later it sounds a bit odd to me (by the way, I'm fully aware that you are a native-speaker and I'm not). I'd be happy if you (or any others who are willing to participate in) help me out to get a better understanding of this tense. How near should something take place for the appropriate usage of this tense (if there is such a criteria)?

Thank you in advance.

I have seen other posts on here saying that one or the other should be used depending on the timeframe, but in my regular everyday use of English, the two have always been interchangeable.

 

[joham]

Thanks a lot, emsrd2d. Grammar says that if the arrangement is fixed and definite, we can use the present simple tense. So I thought we could say "The 2012 Olympic Games are held in London.' because the arrangement is officially fixed. Am I right?

Hoping you can further help me.

 

[cubezero3]

I was thinking the same thing as Joham stated. I guess people can say "The 2012 Olympic Games are held in London", on the ground that, as a well-known event and since it's set to happen in 2010 and be held in London, it's very much not likely for the event to be cancelled or delayed. This sentence is more of stating a fact rather than predicting the future.

 

[Raymott]

Thanks a lot, emsrd2d. Grammar says that if the arrangement is fixed and definite, we can use the present simple tense. So I thought we could say "The 2012 Olympic Games are held in London.' because the arrangement is officially fixed. Am I right?

Hoping you can further help me.

No. This might be true in active voice sentences, but not with the passive.
"The 2012 Olympic Games take place in London.' Active. Correct.
"The 2012 Olympic Games are held in London.' Passive. Wrong.

"Tom and Mary get married in December." Right.
"Tom and Mary are married in December." Wrong

 

[cubezero3]

;-) This is very helpful. Thanks.