aspectual mismatch: Have you ever been so close ... things suddenly all go wrong

There is no mismatch at all.  This sentence, as a matter of fact, is talking about a general experience rather than a specific one;  no real time concept is involved.  The verb "go" is in the simple present tense, while the present perfect is used for the process of trying  to achieve your goal, which begins before "go,"  It can be paraphrased like this: Have you ever had such an experience that things suddenly all go wrong when you have almost achieved your goal.

Thank you. I don't know how natural or common it is to rewrite such sentences with an appositive that-clause, but if the task had to be performed, what tense/aspect should go into the that-clause?

Do you have the experience that you are/have been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

In another forum, the moderator gotube seems to recognize the mismatch on the grounds that the present perfect, which is used to describe experience, is paired with the present simple, which generally describes habitual events, and yet both refer to past experience in the said sentence.

More interestingly, he says, "It'd be more natural to use simple past there than present simple," which would yield the following:

Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all went wrong?

I don't know how a rewriting approach incorporating an appositive that-clause could handle it.

1) The simple present tense does not necessarily refer to “habitual actions.” In my last post, “go” is used because we were talking about a general experience. In that case, no real-time concept is involved. It is better to rewrite the sentence as “Have you ever been close to achieving your goal WHEN things suddenly all go wrong.”

2) Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all went wrong?

In the above sentence, the first part is asking about your general experience, so the present perfect tense is used; in the second part, a conjunction “but” is used to switch abruptly to the subjunctive mood, that’s why the past tense “went” is used, then the sentence reads “but things suddenly all went wrong when you had been so close to achieving your goal.” “When you had been so close to achieving your goal” is omitted in the original sentence.

@raymondaliasapollyon posted:

The following is an interesting combination of the present perfect in the first clause and the present simple in the second. They suppos edly refer to the same experience. Is this mismatch okay? If so, are there any logical explanations?

Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

Hi, Ray—Like f6pafd, I am OK with the combination of tense and aspect in that sentence, and, like "gotube," I would find the sentence very natural with the simple past in the clause introduced by "but":

(1a) Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

(1b)  Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all went wrong?

I think the possibility of the present tense in the second clause has to do with the fact that the situations are repeatable. People are frequently close to achieving goals; and while things do not always go wrong, things do have a tendency sometimes so to go.

I offer the following pairs of examples as proof of the principle I am inducing here, that the compatibility of the present perfect and the present simple in the successive, situationally related clauses stems from the repeatability of the situations in each clause. Take that away and you really do have a mismatch:

(2a) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal is interrupted by a phone call?
(2b) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal was interrupted by a phone call?

(3a) *I have eaten lunch, but my meal is interrupted by a phone call.
(3b) I have eaten lunch, but my meal was interrupted by a phone call.

@f6pafd posted:

1) The simple present tense does not necessarily refer to “habitual actions.” In my last post, “go” is used because we were talking about a general experience. In that case, no real-time concept is involved. It is better to rewrite the sentence as “Have you ever been close to achieving your goal WHEN things suddenly all go wrong.”

2) Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all went wrong?

In the above sentence, the first part is asking about your general experience, so the present perfect tense is used; in the second part, a conjunction “but” is used to switch abruptly to the subjunctive mood, that’s why the past tense “went” is used, then the sentence reads “but things suddenly all went wrong when you had been so close to achieving your goal.” “When you had been so close to achieving your goal” is omitted in the original sentence.

Hello f6pafd,

What do you mean by "general experience"? Is there such a thing as "non-general experience"? For me, experience is experience. Would you mind illustrating the opposite of "general experience"?

And I don't understand why you refer to the "went" as a subjunctive form. What makes you think it is?

@David, Moderator posted:

Hi, Ray—Like f6pafd, I am OK with the combination of tense and aspect in that sentence, and, like "gotube," I would find the sentence very natural with the simple past in the clause introduced by "but":

(1a) Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

(1b)  Have you ever been so close to achieving your goal, but things suddenly all went wrong?

I think the possibility of the present tense in the second clause has to do with the fact that the situations are repeatable. People are frequently close to achieving goals; and while things do not always go wrong, things do have a tendency sometimes so to go.

I offer the following pairs of examples as proof of the principle I am inducing here, that the compatibility of the present perfect and the present simple in the successive, situationally related clauses stems from the repeatability of the situations in each clause. Take that away and you really do have a mismatch:

(2a) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal is interrupted by a phone call?
(2b) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal was interrupted by a phone call?

(3a) *I have eaten lunch, but my meal is interrupted by a phone call.
(3b) I have eaten lunch, but my meal was interrupted by a phone call.

Hello David,

Thank you for the illustration. If the present-tense form "go" is used because the situation is repeatable, why isn't the first clause also cast in the present tense as follows?

Are you ever close to achieving a goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

In the OP sentence, does the present-perfect form "Have you ever been..." also describe a repeatable situation?

@raymondaliasapollyon posted:

If the present-tense form "go" is used because the situation is repeatable, why isn't the first clause also cast in the present tense as follows?

Are you ever close to achieving a goal, but things suddenly all go wrong?

The reason is that the question inquires about an experience of a potentially repeatable situation in the up-to-now domain specified by the present perfect.

@raymondaliasapollyon posted:

In the OP sentence, does the present-perfect form "Have you ever been..." also describe a repeatable situation?

The experience of being close to achieving a goal is a experience that almost everyone has had. The question is whether that repeatable type of experience has, for the interlocutor, ever coincided with the likewise repeatable experience of things suddenly all going wrong, which almost everyone has experienced.

By the general experience, I mean just the general, or an abstract concept, if I may say so,  of "having ever been close to achieving your goal" without reference to what your specific goal was, when, where and how specifically you had such an experience.  You might even have had many such experiences.  Such being the case, the present perfect is the most apt tense to be used.

@f6pafd posted:

With regard  to the subjunctive mood of the verb "go", as I said that the word "but" is a conjunction that just switches the conversation from asking for your general experience to a hypothesis that things suddenly all went wrong, which does not refer to what actually happened, because the speaker are not sure if there was such a misfortune.  That's why the subjunctive mood is called for.

Hi, f6pafd—In my first reply, wanting to be pleasant and agreeable to all, I chose to ignore your reference to the subjunctive mood. However, since you have returned this concept and emphasized it, I feel that it is important to observe that the subjunctive mood is not involved here at all.

An easy way to see this is to use a third-person-singular subject and to vary the example so that "BE" is the verb of the clause introduced by "but." If it does not work to use that verb in the forms "were" or "be," we can deduce that the subjunctive is not being used in this construction.

(a) *Has he ever been close to achieving a goal, but he were delayed?
(b) *Has he ever been close to achieving a goal, but he be delayed?
(c) Has he ever been close to achieving a goal, but he is delayed?
(d) Has he ever been close to achieving a goal, but he was delayed?

As you can see, the subjunctive (present or past) is totally ungrammatical here.

Hi, David.  Thank you for your correction, especially for your considerateness.  The purpose for my active participation in the discussion is to lay bare my weak points and the problems stemming from them.

@David, Moderator posted:

I think the possibility of the present tense in the second clause has to do with the fact that the situations are repeatable. People are frequently close to achieving goals; and while things do not always go wrong, things do have a tendency sometimes so to go.

I offer the following pairs of examples as proof of the principle I am inducing here, that the compatibility of the present perfect and the present simple in the successive, situationally related clauses stems from the repeatability of the situations in each clause. Take that away and you really do have a mismatch:

(2a) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal is interrupted by a phone call?
(2b) Have you ever eaten lunch, but your meal was interrupted by a phone call?

(3a) *I have eaten lunch, but my meal is interrupted by a phone call.
(3b) I have eaten lunch, but my meal was interrupted by a phone call.

Thank you, David. Could you explain why the statement (3a) is incorrect, whereas the interrogative (2a) is okay? Are you saying the situation described by (3a) isn't repeatable, but that described by the interrogative (2a) is?

@f6pafd posted:

By the general experience, I mean just the general, or an abstract concept, if I may say so,  of "having ever been close to achieving your goal" without reference to what your specific goal was, when, where and how specifically you had such an experience. You might even have had many such experiences.  Such being the case, the present perfect is the most apt tense to be used.

With regard  to the subjunctive mood of the verb "go", as I said that the word "but" is a conjunction that just switches the conversation from asking for your general experience to a hypothesis that things suddenly all went wrong, which does not refer to what actually happened, because the speaker are not sure if there was such a misfortune.  That's why the subjunctive mood is called for.

You asked whether it is correct if you say: "Are you ever close to achieving your goal, instead of "Have you ever...."

The difference between them is equivalent to that between "Are you a student?" and "Have you ever been a student?".

The latter is asking about your experience; (If you are not a student now.) but the former is asking if you are a student now.

Thank you for the reply,  f6pafd. If a "general experience" is one without reference to what a specific goal is, or when, where the experience occurred, is the opposite a "non-general experience"? And you seem to tie the compatibility of the present perfect and the present simple to "general experience."

If so, could you exemplify a "non-general experience" and show how it doesn't work with the present perfect and the present simple?

@raymondaliasapollyon posted:

Thank you, David. Could you explain why the statement (3a) is incorrect, whereas the interrogative (2a) is okay? Are you saying the situation described by (3a) isn't repeatable, but that described by the interrogative (2a) is?

Yes, that is what I am saying. Why don't you go ahead and give us your theory?

@David, Moderator posted:

Yes, that is what I am saying. Why don't you go ahead and give us your theory?

I only have a half-baked idea, and it might sound like a restatement of the problem rather than a true explanation.

The present perfect has a few functions; it can be used to describe an experience or indicate an event has recently taken place.

Maybe the interrogative present perfect activates the experiential reading of the present perfect more easily than the declarative. The addition of "ever" strengthens the experiential reading.

Once the reading is activated, the historic present tense becomes available. Hence the present simple tense in the second clause.

The experiential meaning, or should I say experiential space, can be activated in a different way:

Do you have this experience? You are (*have been) so close to achieving a goal, but then things suddenly all go wrong.

As the first sentence establishes the reading, there's no need to use the present perfect in the following sentence. In fact, it's barred.

You said I tied the compatibility of the present perfect and the simple present tense to the general experience. Yes, I do.  Since David has already explicitly explained above, I think there is no need for me to do it again. He explained it in terms of the historical present; while I did it in terms of non-real-time concept. 

With regard to the specific experience, it refers to any experience with adverbials of time, place, etc.  When asked "Have you ever been close to achieving your goal?"  One may say : "Yes, I have."  Ten years ago, I bought a Mega Millions lottery ticket and the drawing showed my numbers matched for the jackpot prize.  I was fairly beside myself with joy.  But things  suddenly all WENT wrong because the winning ticket was nowhere to be found at the last moment when I was ready to set off to claim the prize.  As you can see, with a specific experience, it was quite natural that the past tense "Went" is the apt form to be used; while the simple present is certainly the wrong form.