Five words that give me real trouble when used in past tense

[Orrex]

The first four are related: now, today, tomorrow, yesterday.

I've seen them used successfully in print to indicate time relative to the narrative present, but I'm not comfortable using them that way myself. I'm almost certain that I've never heard them employed in this fashion in normal speech, but they can work just fine when written properly.

The other one is a standalone: must

For example: "Carrying the heavy object, he found that he must stop to rest after every few paces."
Cormac McCarthy uses this construction several times in Suttree, notably when Harrogate is dragging his ill-conceived "boat" down to the river. But when I use the word "must" in writing, it always feels as though it implies the present tense.


Maybe it's just me. Does anyone else have trouble with these words in such context? Or do you have similar troubles with other words?

Share your woes!

[Tangerine LaBamba]

1. The first four are nouns -

so how do you have "tense" trouble? That's usually reserved for verbs.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what the problem is.

Can you give an example?

That sentence from McCarthy is, indeed, the present tense. You're right.

I didn't read that novel, but if it was written in the present tense, then that would be consistent. If it's not, then it's an editing error, I think. Was the sentence contained in flashback scene, where the tense very often changes?

Sometimes it's just sloppy editing, sad to say, things that slip by all the proofing.

I don't have any bugaboo words, although "lay" and "lie" still confound me if I stop to think about them. If I just don't stop, they always shake down properly.......................

[Orrex]

2. I meant when the first four are used as adverbs, rather than as nouns

In spoken conversation, they typically refer to times relative to the actual present. When I say "typically" in this sense, I mean that I've never heard them used otherwise when spoken aloud; others may certainly have different experience in this regard.

Here are two rough, made-up examples that I hope illustrate what I'm talking about:

Bob had to act fast. Now was his only chance to eat the last donut.

"Now" doesn't refer to the actual (i.e., the reader's) present but refers instead to the relative present of the narrative tense.

Yesterday he'd been too slow, and the donuts were gone before he even made it to the office.

"Yesterday" refers to "the day before the narrative present" rather than the day before the reader's present.

Of course, I'm aware that there's no reason to assume that a story takes place in the reader's present time. The glitch for me arises when the words are used to indicate time relative to the narrative present, rather than in their conversational "time relative to now" usage. I'm just not used to thinking of them as pure descriptors, and in my head they refer to specific times-relative-to-now by default.


I confess that the McCarthy quote is a paraphrase from memory, but it definitely occurs in the scene I described. I'm also pretty sure that the usage occurs elsewhere in that book, and maybe in The Outer Dark as well. McCarthy uses certain affectations in his writing, though, so a deliberately quirky word-use would be right up his alley.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. I think you're screwing yourself up

by invoking a time other than the one that exists in the book (or whatever you're reading). Since fiction is often described as "the willing suspension of disbelief," you're obviously not too willing.

Just for this sentence alone - "The glitch for me arises when the words are used to indicate time relative to the narrative present, rather than in their conversational "time relative to now" usage." - you deserve to be spanked.

What is that, time relative to now usage that doesn't jibe with your present tense?

If you're going to read fiction, you have to be willing to enter into the author's time and place. If you don't, you're going to encounter these "glitches," which really are suggestive more to me that the fiction failed and didn't entirely engage you..................................

[Orrex]

4. Well, don't discredit the willingness just because a few phrases trip me up

I'm sure you've read stories that include a clunker phrase or some mannerism that just doesn't ring true for you, haven't you? It's kind of like that.

More specifically in my case, I think that the time-descriptor seems not to match the flavor of the surrounding text, at least to the point where it stands out as conspicuous. It's not fatal to the work as a whole or even to the scene, but it catches my attention enough to make me say "hmm."

[Tangerine LaBamba]

5. Then it fails -

if the sentence trips you up and takes you out of the moment the author had created, it has failed - at least for that moment.

Yeah, I've had those moments, and it's always dispiriting. I never quite get back into whatever I'm reading because I no longer can give the writer the absolute trust I'd handed over when I picked up his/her book, and maybe that's my own shortcoming, but there it is.

Of course, it's also the rule that once you notice it, you'll always notice it, so those words probably jump right out at you.............