I have checked his book. His example was "Now he leaves tomorrow." and he comments that he believes "Yesterday he left tomorrow" is not to be in any way ungrammatical.' From your comment, it seems like native English speakers read tomorrow as "two days after yesterday". Thank you for your answer. It helps.We would never say this. Huddleston comments that he believes 'they are not to be in any way ungrammatical', but apparently gives no examples of genuine uses of this. The problem is 'tomorrow', which deictically refers to tomorrow, not to "the next day". It is unusual to say that yesterday he was going to leave on the following day, and there are various ways this can be said with various tenses, but not with 'tomorrow', which is not relative.
Thank you for clarification. Could you let me me confirm the sentence "Yesterday he was going to leave tomorrow"? So, you read it as "He will leave tomorrow", don't you?'Yesterday he was going to leave tomorrow': This is just fine. He had a plan or intention yesterday.
Actually, I don't read it as anything, other than something which should have been proofread better than it was.Thank you for clarification. Could you let me me confirm the sentence "Yesterday he was going to leave tomorrow"? So, you read it as "He will leave tomorrow", don't you?
Thank you for your insight. You've been helpful.I don't 'read' it at all. It just sounds odd.
As always thank you for your insightful feedback. I'm most grateful for helping me out.Actually, I don't read it as anything, other than something which should have been proofread better than it was ....
As always, thank you for your detailed explanation. It really helps a lot.I agree with DonnyB. This sort of theoretical dialogue is entirely useless in learning or even understanding real English. ....
.....The sentence "Yesterday he left tomorrow" is nonsense.
As always, thank you for your insight. It helps.It's difficult to see where Huddleston is coming from on the basis of that short extract.
The two examples may be 'in no way ungrammatical'. But while I can, with a degree of effort, think of a scenario in which I might say (50), I can't think of any scenario in which I'd say (51).