Use high time in a sentence for each word

Hello

Is there any difference between these two sentences?

a) It is high time we went
b) It is hight time to go

Could we say that sentence a) suggests that it might be a bit late now and sentence b) that it is the right time to go?

Best regards,
Virr

I believe «high time» is always followed by the past tense, never the infinitive, and, as others have said, it’s immediately followed by the person (or entity) you’re berating.

«It’s high time the government got a handle on crime in our streets», for example.

If I may throw in my two cents.

viera said:

Your second sentence doesn’t sound quite right to me, maybe because I don’t think it is used impersonally.

It’s high time you did your homework.
It’s high time he got a job.

How would it sound after a small alteration?
It’s high time for you to go… (…to bed, young lady)

JamesM said:

I believe «high time» is always followed by the past tense, never the infinitive, and, as others have said, it’s immediately followed by the person (or entity) you’re berating.

«It’s high time the government got a handle on crime in our streets», for example.

A90Six said:

High time means the time by which something ought to have been done.
As far as I am aware, the term is always used with a verb in the past tense.

a) It is high time we went.
b) It is high time to go.

This construction is not followed by the past tense but by subjunctive.

That’s curious since I came across the option with infinitive in literature.
Here’s an example:

And now,’ said she, ‘you have been fed and warmed, and I have heard your story, and now it’s high time to call your brother.
R.L. Stevenson; Tales and Fantasies

This one is even impersonal.
I’m looking forward to your comments on that.

So, is there a difference between these two?

a) It is high time for me to go
b) It is hight time I went

Very curious .

«It’s high time» is followed by the subjunctive, so the difference between those two examples is that (a) is not idiomatic, (b) is

Edit:
Please see a few posts later for retraction.

Roma locuta causa finita. Panjandrum, thanks .

Virr

panjandrum said:

«It’s high time» is followed by the subjunctive, so the difference between those two examples is that (a) is not idiomatic, (b) is

I don’t think it’s the subjunctive. If the subjunctive were called for (), I believe the following would be correct:

It’s high time he were going.

or

It’s high time he go.

rather than

It’s high time he went.

I’m pretty sure it’s the past participle.

OK, it’s not subjunctive
Cancel that bit of research. Well, now I read more closely, one of the places I looked is equivocal anyway.
It’s past indicative — or one of those past forms.

It’s high time I went …
It’s high time I was going … — I think that sounds OK too.

… With apologies to those who said so earlier.

It’s high time I stopped trying to answer grammar questions

Well, it is subjunctive — past subjunctive, Panjandrum was right.

«It is time he went» or «it is time he were leaving»

Cheers

virr2 said:

Well, it is subjunctive — past subjunctive, Panjandrum was right.

«It is time he went» or «it is time he were leaving»

Cheers

First, «It is time» and «It is high time» are two different things. The «high time» is an idiomatic phrase.

It is high time he went
It his high time he were leaving (??) (I don’t think this works, but perhaps it could)

I know we would say:

«It is high time he got a job.»

but I can’t imagine hearing

«It is high time he were getting a job.»

even though that is the past subjunctive.

Part of the meaning in «it is high time» is that it’s actually past time for whatever it is to occur. I think that’s why the simple past (what I tend to call the past participle, which is probably wrong since there’s no auxiliary verb) is used.

It’s high time we went
Uses past subjunctive and to me it slightly suggests that we should have already gone. IMHO it expresses a whish. Past tense of indicative is something different from past subjunctive, even though there is no “physical” difference in form.

It’s high time for us to go
Uses infinitive and it conveys an idea that we should go at this moment, this one is an indication to leave.

From grammatical standpoint both are correct, the fact that most of native-speakers opt for a) tells us that it is more often used. This does not mean that the second one is wrong (maybe it’s used in specific situations or within a variety of English).

panjandrum said:

«It’s high time» is followed by the subjunctive, so the difference between those two examples is that (a) is not idiomatic, (b) is

Panj, I know you retracted what you wrote here but I have a question, why is the use of subjunctive not idiomatic?

Thomas1 said:

[…]
Panj, I know you retracted what you wrote here but I have a question, why is the use of subjunctive not idiomatic?

I didn’t intend to suggest that?

I was responding to:
So, is there a difference between these two?
a) It is high time for me to go
b) It is high time I went
Repeating myself: (a) is not idiomatic, (b) is idiomatic — and I thought at the time it was subjunctive but changed my mind later.

I convinced myself that it is a past tense, not subjunctive, when I tried first person singular.
I think «It is high time I was going …» is fine.
But I am certain that «It is high time I were going …» isn’t

Past tense of indicative is something different from past subjunctive, even though there is no “physical” difference in form.

That’s why you have to find an example where the past indicative is «physically» different from the past subjunctive in order to prove or disprove which one it is, as Panjandrum did in the post immediately above this one.

panjandrum said:

Thomas1 said:

Panj, I know you retracted what you wrote here but I have a question, why is the use of subjunctive not idiomatic?

I didn’t intend to suggest that?

I was responding to:
So, is there a difference between these two?
a) It is high time for me to go
b) It is high time I went
Repeating myself: (a) is not idiomatic, (b) is idiomatic — and I thought at the time it was subjunctive but changed my mind later.

I accidentally mistook the post you answered to. I thought you replied to the post number 1, the author reversed the order of the expressions in one of his later posts (#11). I apologize.

panjandrum said:

I convinced myself that it is a past tense, not subjunctive, when I tried first person singular.
I think «It is high time I was going …» is fine.
But I am certain that «It is high time I were going …» isn’t

JamesM said:

That’s why you have to find an example where the past indicative is «physically» different from the past subjunctive in order to prove or disprove which one it is, as Panjandrum did in the post immediately above this one.

If you say that this is past tense indicative (but I still have my doubts) I’d like to know how you would put that (i.e. It’s high time I went) into reported speech, please.

Thomas1 said:

If you say that this is past tense indicative (but I still have my doubts) I’d like to know how you would put that (i.e. It’s high time I went) into reported speech, please.

He said it was high time he went.

Is there a problem with that? I don’t understand how this relates to the discussion.

JamesM said:

He said it was high time he went.

Is there a problem with that? I don’t understand how this relates to the discussion.

Well, if that’s a past tense indicative it should backshift as a normal indicative but it does not.
Please, compare:
He went.
He said he had gone.
The above example illustrates a simple use of past tense of indicative, as you can see it backshifts.

Can you spot the difference now?

That is a curious point, Thomas1, and I have no explanation.
I might be able to set out the apparent contradiction more clearly.

«It is high time I went to Italy.»
converts to
He said it was high time he went to Italy.

«I went to Italy.»
converts to
He said he had gone to Italy.

All I can say is that I’m almost certain this is the way it is.
Maybe in the morning there will be an explanation.

panjandrum said:

That is a curious point, Thomas1, and I have no explanation.
I might be able to set out the apparent contradiction more clearly.

«It is high time I went to Italy.»
converts to
He said it was high time he went to Italy.

«I went to Italy.»
converts to
He said he had gone to Italy.

All I can say is that I’m almost certain this is the way it is.
Maybe in the morning there will be an explanation.

Yes — curious indeed. I see Thomas’s thinking but I do agree that the «went» stays as «went» in the reported speech version. To my ear «went» sounds right there and more over «He said it was high time he had gone to Italy» sounds bizarre.

English doesn’t make huge use of the pluperfect — I suppose this is just an instance where keeping the sentence lighter and simpler wins out against supposed «logic» of the tenses.

I think it points out that it is an idiomatic phrase that retains its character, no matter what the form.

«It’s high time I went.»
«I said it was high time I went.»
«He said that it was high time he went.»
«At some point tomorrow, during the course of the wake, I will have drunk too much, and it will be high time I went.»

It invariably takes what I call the past tense, which I guess is really the past indicative (looking at a chart now.)

Just my opinion, but I haven’t found an example that breaks with this pattern.

Here something that I hope will shed some light on the subject.

It be time construction is followed by a subordinate clause. This clause is definitely counterfactual. Taking the example from the original post:
It’s high time we went. It more or less means we aren’t going but we should be going. It implies that the situation is not yet in progress and suggests that we should start going.
The structure used in the construction is neither past tense of indicative nor subjunctive. This is something that in grammar bears the name “modal preterite.” Even though it looks like the past tense of indicative mood in form and “behaves” like subjunctive (and perhaps even sounds like it*) it is something different from them looking at it from a grammatical stand point.
The construction it be time hardly allows the use of subjunctive, although The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language lists one attested case (from a British newspaper) where the subjunctive is used:

It’s high time the true cost of monarchy were pointed out.​

I myself found another one:

Of course the differentiation whether we are dealing with subjunctive or modal preteite is only possible with the verb to be.
In many languages forms that are used to express hypothetical or counterfactual clauses/constructions are identical with the ones that express indicative past tense, or they are their derivatives (Seiler 1971, Steele 1975, Langacker 1978, James 1982, Fleischman 1989, Molenicki 2001), but the mood and aspect still differ.

Note that for the sake of clarity which is very important in order to apprehend the whole concept of this explanation; in each case I used the word subjunctive it should be replaced with irrealis as this is a proper grammar designation for the mood in question.

*This is just my speculation and if I’m wrong, please, do not hesitate to point this out.

hello, everyone:

1. It is high time that he ____ to bed.

2. It was high time that he ___ to bed.

A. went B had gone

I know A fits 1, but which one fits 2.? Still A, right?

Thanks in advance

How about «It’s high time that we should do it now.»?

In China, students are taught that «should» can be used here. I’m wondering if it’s only natural to say «it’s high time that we did it.»

it’s only natural to say «it’s high time that we did it.»

We should (ought to) do it now.
It’s high time we did it.

I agree. ‘Its high time we should do it now’ is incorrect for me.

I noticed that ‘high time’ is used in all the examples above. I use ‘time’ alone in this way too. ‘It’s time I left.’ Other modifiers like ‘nearly’ or ‘about’ can come before ‘time’ too.