Sorry, I think you wronged me. Having reading your explanation and that in other forum again, I still don’t find your explanations contradicts each other. I’m sure they are compatible and supplementary to each other. I’m just wrong about the usage of 相対テンス and 絶対テンス, which is only employed in the relative clause, not the main clause. (Although I have not grasp the usage of 相対テンス, as I asked about it in other thread). I accept that usually Japanese novels are based on past tense, not present tense.If you are convinced by other forum's comment, good for you!
If you are not convinced by my answers, just forget them for your sake.
So is it right to think that the past progressive and also the past perfect in English are written in the ていた form (in the main clause) in Japanese? Although I have seen a lot of ているs in the main clause, actually they are derived from ていた for vividness, right?It might be help for you if you think that:
The simple past tense and also the present perfect tense in English are written in the past tense, ~~~た, in Japanese.
You are wrong to say something about ていた in this thread, which is completely different from the context of this thread. You should create another thread if you want to know.So is it right to think that the past progressive and also the past perfect in English are written in the ていた form (in the main clause) in Japanese? Although I have seen a lot of ているs in the main clause, actually they are derived from ていた for vividness, right?
Are you suggesting that not all だった/かった in the narrative in the novel are past tense? If so, I agree. I have encountered an example like that. If you are not suggesting that, then could you have a look at this example?I was talking about only this thread's context.
The red part isn’t past tense but shows that the recognition on the part of the speaker has already occurred. Does it make sense?