A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:

You could be packed up and ready.
Knowing exactly where to go.
How come you miss the connection?
No use in asking.
The answer is "Nobody knows".

Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
Or is there a good reason for the present tense?

The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU

Thank You,

Paul Epstein

On 11/06/23 21:57, Paul Epstein wrote:
> A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:
>
> You could be packed up and ready.
> Knowing exactly where to go.
> How come you miss the connection?
> No use in asking.
> The answer is "Nobody knows".
>
> Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
> Or is there a good reason for the present tense?
>
> The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU

The choice of tense looks OK to me. I believe it's technically called
the present habitual tense.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

Paul Epstein <pepstein5@gmail.com> quoted:
>You could be packed up and ready.
>Knowing exactly where to go.
>How come you miss the connection?

The verb forms "could be" (as used in "could be packed up and
ready") and "miss" refer to the present time frame. However,
this usage should be considered within the framework of what
is known as the "extended present", whereby the state of lack of
readiness and the missing of the connection are not necessarily
simultaneous events, but rather occur within the same general
period or time frame, such as over the course of one day.

It is also conceivable that the narrative voice takes on a
participatory role alongside the protagonist as events unfold.
For example, at noon, the main character may have failed
to complete his preparations, with the narrative perspective
providing commentary on this state. At 1 p.m., however,
the main character misses "the connection" and once again the
narrative stance offers its observations on this event.

On Sunday, June 11, 2023 at 8:14:33 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 11/06/23 21:57, Paul Epstein wrote:

> > A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:
> >
> > You could be packed up and ready.
> > Knowing exactly where to go.
> > How come you miss the connection?
> > No use in asking.
> > The answer is "Nobody knows".
> >
> > Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
> > Or is there a good reason for the present tense?
> > The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU
>
> The choice of tense looks OK to me. I believe it's technically called
> the present habitual tense.

It might also be a historical present -- employed for vividness.
Anyway, it's a song lyric, i.e. poetry (sort of).

On 11/06/2023 11:57 p.m., Paul Epstein wrote:
> A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:
>
> You could be packed up and ready.
> Knowing exactly where to go.
> How come you miss the connection?
> No use in asking.
> The answer is "Nobody knows".
>
> Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
> Or is there a good reason for the present tense?
>
> The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU
>
> Thank You,
>
> Paul Epstein
>

I'd say it's the "tenseless" present, as used in stage directions (He
opens the door) and plot summaries (Toto escapes and returns to
Dorothy). The "could" sets up an imagined scenario in which this tense
is appropriate. In fact, if you replaced "could be" with "are", I think
it could be understood in just the same way (though it would nobble the
metre).

On Sunday, June 11, 2023 at 10:21:04 PM UTC+1, Ross Clark wrote:
> On 11/06/2023 11:57 p.m., Paul Epstein wrote:
> > A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:
> >
> > You could be packed up and ready.
> > Knowing exactly where to go.
> > How come you miss the connection?
> > No use in asking.
> > The answer is "Nobody knows".
> >
> > Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
> > Or is there a good reason for the present tense?
> >
> > The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU
> >
> > Thank You,
> >
> > Paul Epstein
> >
> I'd say it's the "tenseless" present, as used in stage directions (He
> opens the door) and plot summaries (Toto escapes and returns to
> Dorothy). The "could" sets up an imagined scenario in which this tense
> is appropriate. In fact, if you replaced "could be" with "are", I think
> it could be understood in just the same way (though it would nobble the
> metre).

Which "could"?

Paul Epstein

On Sunday, June 11, 2023 at 10:53:03 PM UTC+1, Paul Epstein wrote:
> On Sunday, June 11, 2023 at 10:21:04 PM UTC+1, Ross Clark wrote:
> > On 11/06/2023 11:57 p.m., Paul Epstein wrote:
> > > A (somewhat) famous song by Paul Brady has the lyrics:
> > >
> > > You could be packed up and ready.
> > > Knowing exactly where to go.
> > > How come you miss the connection?
> > > No use in asking.
> > > The answer is "Nobody knows".
> > >
> > > Shouldn't "miss" be replaced by "missed" here?
> > > Or is there a good reason for the present tense?
> > >
> > > The complete song is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SslFtF8XZhU
> > >
> > > Thank You,
> > >
> > > Paul Epstein
> > >
> > I'd say it's the "tenseless" present, as used in stage directions (He
> > opens the door) and plot summaries (Toto escapes and returns to
> > Dorothy). The "could" sets up an imagined scenario in which this tense
> > is appropriate. In fact, if you replaced "could be" with "are", I think
> > it could be understood in just the same way (though it would nobble the
> > metre).
> Which "could"?
Sorry, I get it now.
"You are packed up and ready"

Paul Epstein