Telling the time – Nói giờ

Khi muốn hỏi về thời gian chúng ta thường dùng những câu hỏi sau đều có nghĩa là “Mấy giờ rồi?”
⦁ What time is it now?
⦁ What’s the time?
⦁ Do you have the time?
Ngoài ra bạn cũng có thể hỏi:
⦁ Can you tell me the time, please?
⦁ Do you know what time it is?
(“Làm ơn cho hỏi mấy giờ rồi?”)
Chúng ta có 3 cách nói giờ là giờ chẵn, giờ hơn và giờ kém.

Giờ chẵn
(luôn có o’clock đi kèm)
Số giờ + o’clock 7h00: seven o’clock
Giờ hơn
(dùng past/ after)
Số phút + past + số giờ 7h20: twenty past seven
10h10: ten after ten
Giờ kém
(dùng to)
Số phút + to + số giờ 8h40: twenty to nine
11h45: a quarter to twelve
Cách nói chung cho cả giờ hơn và giờ kém Số giờ + số phút/td> 1h50: one fifty
3h45: three forty-five

Lưu ý:
⦁ Chỉ dùng o’clock với giờ đúng.
⦁ Số 0 được phát âm là “oh”.
⦁ Ta có cách nói khác với giờ hơn/ kém 15 và 30 phút như sau:
15 phút = a quarter = fifteen
30 phút = half past = thirty
⦁ Khung thời gian 12 giờ thường được sử dụng trong lối nói hàng ngày. Còn trong thời gian biểu, người ta thường sử dụng khung giờ 24 tiếng. Tuy nhiên trong văn nói, khung giờ 24 tiếng chỉ được sử dụng trong những thông báo chính thức chứ không được sử dụng trong lối nói thông thường.
⦁ Để chỉ thời điểm trước hay sau buổi trưa, người ta có cách diễn đạt mang tính trang trọng hơn là a.m. (ante meridiem- trước buổi trưa) và p.m. (post meridiem – sau buổi trưa).

Adverbs of frequency – Trạng từ chỉ tần suất

I always have breakfast.
They usually finish work at 5:00.
She sometimes watches TV in the evening.
He never eats meat.

⦁ Trạng từ chỉ tần suất là những trạng từ diễn tả mức độ thường xuyên của một hành động (thỉnh thoảng, thường thường, luôn luôn, ít khi ..). Chúng được dùng để trả lời câu hỏi HOW OFTEN? – How often do you visit your grandmother? (Bạn có thường xuyên đi thăm bà của mình không?) và được đặt sau động từ “to be” hoặc trước động từ chính.
Ví dụ: John is always on time.
He never comes late.
⦁ Trong câu khẳng định, trạng từ chỉ tần suất đứng sau chủ ngữ và trước động từ chính.
Ví dụ: I always have coffee for breakfast.
⦁ Trong câu khẳng định, trạng từ chỉ tần suất đứng sau trợ động từ “don’t, doesn’t” và trước động từ chính. Ví dụ: I don’t usually have breakfast.
⦁ Chúng ta luôn sử dụng động từ dạng khẳng định với trạng từ chỉ tần suất “never”.
Ví dụ: I never eat meat

The major themes as well as the significance of Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi

Mystici Corporis Christi is a papal encyclical issued by Pope Pius XII during World War II, on the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ. Its significance is shown the theological views which rejected two extreme views of the Church, namely rationalistic or purely sociological understanding of the Church and exclusively mystical understanding of the Church. The encyclical addresses four major themes: the origins of this doctrine; certain aspects of the Mystical Body; reasons to call the Church mystical; errors that have arisen from an incorrect understanding of this doctrine; participation of each member.

Reflecting on the origin of this doctrine, Pius XII referred to the salvation history. Man was excluded from adoption as children of God because of sin, but, through Christ, they receive the power to become sons of God. Out of his loving will, Christ established the Mystical Body so that the sacred work of redemption would endure and continue throughout the centuries, in part due to the direct participation of His Body. In addition, the doctrine is rooted in the Scripture, in the letter of Saint Paul to Colossians, and had been enforced by the teaching of Pope Leo XIII.

Regarding aspects of the Mystical Body, people through baptism are incorporated into this Body. This Body includes various states of life: clergy or laity, living a contemplative life or living in the world in their apostolates, in state of matrimony or of single. The Mystical Body includes both saints and sinners, except those in the case with much more serious matters such as schism, heresy, or apostasy. This Body is nourished and sustained by grace of sacraments and by doctrines which are important to provide the correct religious education. Pope Pius also signified that Christ, the Head, wills to be helped by His Body to carry out the work of redemption. “That is not because He is indigent and weak, but rather because He has so willed it for the greater glory of His spotless Spouse” (44).

The encyclical also provides the reason why the Body of Christ should be called mystical. It is to distinguish the Body of the Church from Christ’s physical body. Also, “this name enables us to distinguish it from any other body, whether in the physical or the moral order” (60). That is, “the Church […] as a perfect society of its kind, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies; it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish” (63).

Then, the encyclical indicates errors that have arisen from misunderstanding of mystical body of Christ. Pope Pius criticized the error of quietism is that which “attributes the whole spiritual life of Christians and their progress in virtue exclusively to the action of the Divine Spirit, setting aside and neglecting the collaboration which is due from us” (87). He also warned the notions that underestimate the role of the frequent confession of venial sins (88), that consider private prayer with little worth (89), that our prayers should be directed not to the person of Jesus Christ, but rather to God (90). Lastly, it is significant that the encyclical pointed out the new role of the laity to encourage their active participation. Participation of each member is to strengthen and build up the Mystical Body of Christ. Participation can be expressed in different ways, such as prayer especially in the Eucharistic Sacrifice, works of Christian charity, denial of what is forbidden.

Holiness is Necessary for Missionaries

It is great when we see the Church grows in number and geography. This achievement is the result of untiredly working in her mission. However, “[mission of the Church does not primarily focus] on institutional development, expansion, or numerical increase. Its focus is fundamentally theological, namely the realization of the fullness of the knowledge and love of God which is boundless and all embracing”[1] Aware of the primary focus of mission, we will realize the necessity of holiness.

Holiness is a universal call to all people. It is the call to be in union with the Holy Trinity. In her mission, the Church is sent to the people of the world to gather them to God. When we perceive holiness as union with God, mission of the Church is simply understood as making people holy. If anyone wants to be in union with the Holy Trinity, first and foremost, he or she must have knowledge of God. Subsequently, the knowledge of God strengthens the union with Him. The more we know God, the more we love Him. Furthermore, if the Church wants to draw people to the union with God, she must be first in union with Him. She must be the model of that union. In other words, she must be holy herself so that she can make others holy. The importance of holiness is mentioned in Vatican II, “[missionary activity] bears witness to her sanctity while spreading and promoting it” (Ad Gentes 6).

The Church’s mission is mission of all members. The term “missioner” refers to those devoting their lives for missionary with their charism. Nevertheless, sharing the prophetic office with Christ in baptism, everyone is called be a missioner in their lives. The ordinary living of Christian life is an essential place for the Church’s mission. There, Christians can make God known to others by expressing what they believe, how they celebrate their faith, how they live their faith, and how they communicate to God. In their lives of holiness, the holiness of God is introduced, and the Gospel is proclaimed effectively. In this manner, the mission of the Church is accomplished without requiring professional activities since holiness is the only thing that Christians need to focus.

Lastly, to demonstrate a life of holiness concretely, I would like to indicate that in Christianity, holiness is equivalent to love. Thus, showing our holiness means showing our love to God and to neighbors. In Christian life, showing our love toward God is not enough, but our love become meaningful only if we include our neighbors in our love toward God. Love is manifest in our giving to others. Jesus is the greatest example of love because he totally gives himself for us. When we continue Jesus’s mission, we necessarily imitate his example of love. There are various ways to express our love in Christian life, such as kindness, hospitality, generosity, or works of charity. Although those works seem normal in human life, they indeed contribute to the Church’s mission. We truly witness God’s love in those little works.


[1] Michael McCabe, Re-Discovering the Focus of Mission (Dublia: Irish Missionary Union, 1997), 2, quoted in Noel Connolly, “Ad Gentes to Evangelii Gaudium: Mission’s Move to Center,” The Australasian Catholic Record 92, no. 4(2015):389-390.

Scriptural Perspective and Church’s Teaching on Homosexual Acts

Homosexuality is a topic that draws considerable attention from society. Because this is a complicated issue with deep emotional implications for many people, it is necessary to distinguish homosexual orientations and acts. One is determined to be a homosexual “if he or she (1) is attracted physically or erotically by persons of his or her own sex; (2) usually has no similar attraction to the opposite sex; and (3) in many instances has a positive revulsion for sexual acts with a member of the opposite sex.”[1] While the Church welcomes homosexual people into her pastoral care, she insists that the sexual acts between those of the same sexes are morally wrong. As “all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and regulated by Sacred Scripture,”[2] the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is deeply rooted in the Scripture. However, dissent theologians have argued against the Church’s teaching. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present some scriptural debates regarding homosexual behaviors and to briefly indicate key principals regarding the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.

Several scriptural passages can be referred as evidence useful to support the Church’s stand on this moral issue. However, the proponents of homosexual acts criticize that evidence in different ways. In Genesis 19, when the two angels visited Lot’s house, the townsmen of Sodom came and asked Lot to bring the two angels to them so that they may have sexual relations. In this context, the Sodomites were trying to perform homosexual rape. Consequently, they were destroyed in the rain of sulfur and fire because of their sexual immorality. Nevertheless, the proponents of homosexual acts deny this interpretation for various reasons. For example, the Hebrew term referring to a sexual act means “to know.” Thus, the proponents do not refer the Sodomites’ demand to sexual relations but to merely their curiosity to know who the angels are. Here, the main cause for their destruction is inhospitality.[3] Therefore, according to this interpretation, this passage is irrelevant as evidence of the condemnation of homosexual acts.

The Old Testament texts that directly condemns homosexual acts are from the Book of Leviticus. “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination” (Lev. 18:22). “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, they have committed an abomination; the two of them shall be put to death; their bloodguilt is upon them” (Lev. 20:13). The phrase “as with a woman” is traditionally considered to refer to the homosexual behavior between two males. The punishment of this action is death and traditionalists use this interpretation as evidence of the condemnation of homosexual acts. This interpretation was almost universally accepted in the past. However, under the influence of social revolutions which tend to accept same sex relations, an influx of contention about that phrase emerged quickly. For instance, many scholars, such as Browson, Boswell, and Malchow, link the prohibitions in the two verses to the “injunction against the practices of idolatry and the urgency of avoiding the practices of surrounding nations.”[4] That is, the moral logic of the Levitical prohibitions is not isolated from the cultic context. Browson argues that the biological gender distinction in sexual acts is not required by the Law of Leviticus because if it is, why did Leviticus not mention the prohibition of female-female homosexual acts?[5] Boswell argues that the term “abomination” “does not usually signify something intrinsically evil, like rape or theft, but something which is ritually unclean.”[6] These arguments imply that Leviticus was dealing with the religious problems of its time which are no longer problematic in our contemporary era. That is, the prohibition of Leviticus alone is insufficient to establish moral codes regarding homosexuality.

In the New Testament, the evidence against homosexuality can be found in several Pauline texts, such as 1 Cor 6:9-10 and Rom 1:18-32. In Corinthians, “boy prostitutes and sodomites,” which refer to homosexual acts, are among vices that prevent men from inheriting the kingdom of God. The term “sodomites” refers to adult males who indulged in homosexual practices with boys. In Romans, Paul attacks the same-gender sexual relations because they are contrary to the truth revealed in creation. Because of the blindness of the truth, they degrade their bodies through lustful desires. Homosexual acts, shown as consequences of the blindness, are unnatural and shameful. These acts are condemned not only because of excessiveness or exploitation of the acts, such as using sexual slaves, but also because they imply an uncontrolled passion. Paul affirms that they “received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity” (Rom 1:27). The traditional interpretation is that in creation sexual relations are intended to fulfill the gender complementary of human nature. Therefore, homosexual acts violate the intention revealed in creation.

The proponents of homosexual acts challenge the interpretations in various ways. They try to remove the reference between the terms, translated “boy prostitutes and sodomites” in 1 Corinthians, to same-sex relations. For instance, Browson proposes that the vice lists play rhetorical function to “single out stereotypically abhorrent behavior that is widely regarded in the community with condemnation, ridicule, or rejection.”[7] The lists have limited uses in the ancient time, and they do not create moral codes. As rejecting the traditionalists’ interpretation on Roman 1:18-32, Browson argues that “gender complementary is never directly taught in Scripture in such generic terms.”[8] While he does not reject the authority of the texts, his contrary perspective is based on the underlying moral logic that shapes the texts and its application to contemporary life. In contrast, the Church teaches that the theology of creation found in Genesis tells us that “in the complementarity of the sexes, they are called to reflect the inner unity of the Creator.”[9]

In general, the proponents of homosexual acts do not reject the authority of the Scriptures, but their exegesis rejects the idea that Scripture condemns homosexual acts. Most arguments deny the relevance of Scriptures’ application to the present. For instance, Malchow concluded in his article that “it is possible that any biblical texts that speak against homosexuals are based on prejudices that came out of the society of that day, prejudices that have endured until the present.”[10] However, although biblical authors often involved prejudices in their writings, those arguments are poor. It is because they ignore the content and unity of the whole of Scripture, the living tradition of the whole Church, and the harmony between elements of faith.[11] Cardinal Ratzinger, in his letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the pastoral care of homosexual persons, affirms “a clear consistency within Scripture themselves on the moral issues of homosexual behavior.”[12] He also affirms the organic continuity of the Church’s teaching with the Scriptures and the Tradition. Therefore, an interpretation that contradicts to the living Tradition is unacceptable.

It is important to bear in mind that the teaching on homosexuality takes love as its principle and motivation. Thus, as the Church takes charge of directing mankind toward what is truly good, she condemns homosexual acts but not homosexual persons. According to the Church, in the bond of marriage, sexual behaviors are directed toward “two inseparable ends, namely the expression of marital love and the procreation and education of children.”[13] In other words, the unitive character of sexuality must always accompany the procreative character. However, homosexual acts in no way can fully achieve the natural ends of human sexuality. The Catechism of the Church declares that “[Homosexual acts] are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”[14]

Nevertheless, same-sex attraction is not a sin itself because one did not choose their attraction. However, this disordered attraction puts homosexuals in a danger of committing sin. Thus, they need remedies for their conditions in both pastoral and spiritual ways because they also share with us the universal call to holiness. The Church urges them to train themselves in the virtues of chastity and of self-mastery. The USCCB advises that “[the homosexuals] should also seek out the guidance of a confessor and spiritual director who will support their quest to live a chaste life.”[15] In addition, the Catechism of the Church indicates that “at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”[16] Pastorally, friendship and community have crucial roles because the disordered sexual tendencies easily receive negative reactions such as discriminations or boycotts. They really need empathy and compassion from others. Spiritually, those dealing with the disorders of sexual inclinations cannot overcome challenges of their conditions without being in intimate relationship with God.

In conclusion, the Church’s perspectives on homosexuality are not founded on subjective sentiments, but they are rooted deeply in the Scriptures. The place of sexuality in God’s plan is clearly revealed in the Scriptures. Regarding homosexuality, both Old and New Testaments provides various texts against the homosexual behaviors. The proponents of homosexual acts have provided various interpretations to reject the links between those texts and the condemnation of homosexual acts. However, their interpretations are so poor and contrary to natural law and the authentic Tradition. The Church also clearly distinguishes between the tendencies and behaviors of homosexuality. She takes great cares to welcome homosexuals and urges everyone to uphold them with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

Notes

  1. William May, Ronald Lawler, and Joseph Boyle, Catholic Sexual Ethics: A Summary, Explanation, & Defense (Huntington: IN, Our Sunday Visitor),287.
  2. Dei Verbum, no. 21.
  3. See John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980), 92-5.
  4. James Brownson, Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans), 270. See John Boswell, 100-103; Bruce Malchow, “Scripture as a Norm of Moral Deliberation and Its Application to Homosexuality,” Currents in Theology and Mission 31, no. 6 (December 2004): 471.
  5. See Brownson, 271-3.
  6. Boswell, 100.
  7. Browson, 275.
  8. Browson, 262.
  9. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, no. 6.
  10. Malchow, 472.
  11. “Since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with the harmony which exists between elements of the faith. It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God” (Dei Verbum, No. 12).
  12. Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, no. 5.
  13. USCCB, Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care, no. 3.
  14. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2357.
  15. USCCB, no. 7.
  16. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2359.

Bibliography

Arinze, Franci. “Seeking a Pastoral Response.” Statement on a recent decision of the Flemish bishops regarding a special blessing for same-sex couples, 2022. Accessed October 27, 2022. https://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-113-2022-monday-september-26-arinze.

Boswell, John. Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century. University of Chicago Press, 1980.

Brownson, James. Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2013.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics. Rome, December 1975.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. Rome, October 1986.

Davis, Ellen F. “Reasoning with Scripture.” Anglican Theological Review 90, no. 3 (Summer 2008): 513–19.

Dunn, James. “God’s Wrath on Humankind – from a Jewish Perspectives (1:18-32).” In World Biblical Commentary. Vol. 38, Romans 1-8, 51-76. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1988.

Hartley, John. “Laws Governing the Extended Family (18:1-30).” In World Biblical Commentary. Vol. 4, Leviticus, 280-301. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1992.

______. “Laws with Penalties for Sacrifice to Molek, Sorcery, and Sexual Offenses (20:1-27).” In World Biblical Commentary. Vol. 4, Leviticus, 326-41. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1992.

Heater, Gilbert. “Homosexuality, Chastity, and Beauty Reclaimed: An Examination of Disordered Passion and Perfect Virtue in Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae.” A paper for the course Thomistic Philosophy, Saint Vincent College, 2020.

Krom, Michael. “Chapter 7: Aquinas’s Moral, Economic, and Political Theory Today.” In Justice and Charity: An Introduction to Aquinas’s Moral, Economic, and Political Thought, 177-219. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2020.

Malchow, Bruce V. “Scripture as a Norm of Moral Deliberation and Its Application to Homosexuality.” Currents in Theology and Mission 31, no. 6 (December 2004): 465–72.

May, William, Ronald Lawler, and Joseph Boyle. Catholic Sexual Ethics: A Summary, Explanation & Defense. 3rd ed Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 2011.

Norris, Richard, Ellen Davis, William Johnson, Richard Fabian, Victoria Matthews, Barry Morgan, Stephen Bouman, et al. “Some Notes on the Current Debate Regarding Homosexuality and the Place of Homosexuals in the Church.” Anglican Theological Review 90, no. 3 (January 1, 2008).

“Part 3: Life in Christ.” In Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. 2016.

Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum. Rome, November 1965.

Steven Greenberg. Wrestling with God and Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition. Vol. Updated ed. Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press, 2004.

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care. November 2006.


[1] William May, Ronald Lawler, and Joseph Boyle, Catholic Sexual Ethics: A Summary, Explanation, & Defense

(Huntington: IN, Our Sunday Visitor),287.

[2] Dei Verbum, no. 21.

[3] See John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,

1980), 92-5.

[4] James Brownson, Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships (Grand

Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans), 270. See John Boswell, 100-103; Bruce Malchow, “Scripture as a Norm of

Moral Deliberation and Its Application to Homosexuality,” Currents in Theology and Mission 31, no. 6

(December 2004): 471.

[5] See Brownson, 271-3.

[6] Boswell, 100.

[7] Browson, 275.

[8] Browson, 262.

[9] The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care

of Homosexual Persons, no. 6.

[10] Malchow, 472.

[11] “Since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with the harmony which exists between elements of the faith. It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God” (Dei Verbum, No. 12).

[12] Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, no. 5.

[13] USCCB, Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care, no. 3.

[14] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2357.

[15] USCCB, no. 7.

[16] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2359.

Hiện tại đơn với ngôi he, she và it (Present simple with he, she and it)

(+) (-) (?)
He works.
She works.
It works.
He doesn’t work.
She doesn’t work.
It doesn’t work.
Does he work?
Does she work?
Does it work?
Yes, he/ she/ it does.
No, he/ she/ it doesn’t.

⦁ Trong những bài học trước chúng ta đã lần lượt tìm hiểu về thì hiện tại đơn lần lượt với các ngôi I, you, we, they; trong bài học ngày hôm nay chúng ta cùng tìm hiểu về ba ngôi cuối cùng là he, she it. Các ngôi I, you, we, they động từ chính trong câu luôn ở dạng nguyên thể không chia, để hình thành thể phủ định ta chỉ việc thêm trợ động từ “don’t” và hình thành thể nghi vấn thêm trợ động từ “do”.
⦁ Với ba chủ ngữ là he, she, it để hình thành thể khẳng định ta thêm “s” hoặc “es” vào sau động từ chính trong câu, như he works, she works….
⦁ Để hình thành thể phủ định ta thêm trợ động từ “doesn’t = does not” vào trước động từ chính, lúc này động từ không chia nữa mà trở về động từ nguyên thể như he doesn’t work….
⦁ Để hình thành thể nghi vấn ta đảo trợ động từ “does” lên đầu câu, động từ ở dạng nguyên thể, như Does she work….

Quy tắc chia động từ ở thì hiện tại thường với chủ ngữ là ngôi 3 số ít.

I work in an office.
I live in Spain.
I watch CNN.
I finish work at 8:00.
I study history.
He works in an office. (+ s)
He lives in Spain.
She watches CNN. (+ es, từ kết thúc bằng ch, sh, s, ss, x)
The film finishes at 8:00.
He studies history. (y ies, từ kết thúc bằng phụ âm + y)

⦁ Hầu hết các động từ được thành lập bằng cách thêm “s” vào sau động từ.
Ví dụ: eats, drinks, lives, likes….
⦁ Với những động từ kết thúc bằng ch, sh, s, ss, x ta thêm đuôi “es” vào sau động từ.
Ví dụ: watches, finishes, kisses…..
⦁ Với những động từ kết thúc bằng “y” trước đó là một phụ âm ta chuyển “y” thành “i” rồi thêm đuôi “es”. Nếu trước đó là một nguyên âm thì ta giữ nguyên và thêm đuôi “s”.
Ví dụ: studies, cries,…
⦁ Ba động từ bất quy tắc là have, do go với chủ ngữ là he, she, it sẽ được chia thành has, doesgoes.