> そんなわけで、まだ日も暮れない夕方の通学路を、駅に向かってゆっくりと歩く俺と加藤。

I encountered this quote in a light novel and am stuck on how to interpret it.
It feels like 歩く should be "walking" in this context, but it is not 歩いている. The
sentence does not seem to express future or habitual action like the
dictionary form of a verb usually does either.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-18T05:16:04.887
25125
2017-02-17T15:01:06.450
2015-06-18T16:41:43.807
9896
7712
question
grammar relative-clauses aspect
How does the present tense work in a relative clause?
You can use verbs in dictionary form to express the action of the noun.

You can also change most of the verbs into ている forms without any change in
meaning.

You can also use た forms, especially if there are time words marking past like
昨日 etc.

All in all, all they are doing is acting like an adjective to describe the
noun it is connected to. So you are correct in your translation. You can
confirm the tense (ended action or future action etc.) by the text around the
sentence. Hope that helps.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-18T11:07:16.067
25131
2015-06-18T11:07:16.067
10390
25125
answer
Japanese verbs don't really have tense. They are more aspect based.

  * Is the action completed? 歩いた
  * Or not completed? 歩く

Also, 歩く is a verb of movement（移動動詞）like 森を走る or 空を飛ぶ, so it uses を and
already implies an action that takes place over a period of time.

So, the sentence you provide from the book is part of a story narrative. It's
very common for Japanese to prefer the imperfect aspect (not yet completed
action) in such a narrative context. After all, the story isn't over yet
right? :P
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-13T02:12:11.833
35879
2016-06-13T02:12:11.833
15738
25125
answer
There's not really enough context for a translation of the whole sentence, but
I would do the following with the verb in question...

`駅に向かってゆっくりと**歩く**俺と加藤。`

> Kato and I slowly **walked** toward the station.
>
> Kato and I leisurely **made our way** to the station.

I would choose "walked" or "made our way" in the past tense because it's clear
from the context that this is a narrative about something that has already
happened.

I guess you could go with...

> Kato and I **were** slowly **walking** to the station.

...if you wanted to emphasize that part.

I guess what I'm getting at is that the fact that 歩く isn't 歩いている doesn't in
any way rule out the idea that it's a progressive action taking place in the
past. The verb 歩く in this context already gives that information, so if the
author had chosen to write...

`駅に向かってゆっくりと歩いている俺と加藤。`

... then the basic meaning would not change and there wouldn't be any
grammatical problems, but it would seem like he was emphasizing the "we were
walking" part for some reason.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-13T02:30:40.297
35881
2016-06-13T02:30:40.297
15739
25125
answer
OP says he/she is "stuck on how to interpret it."

Either of the following works :

> そんなわけで、まだ日も暮れない夕方の通学路を、駅に向かってゆっくりと歩いている俺と加藤。
>
> そんなわけで、まだ日も暮れない夕方の通学路を、駅に向かってゆっくりと歩く俺と加藤。

The latter sounds more like a line from a movie (TV drama) script. The
narrator probably imagines himself a hero in a movie or a TV drama.

It also seems like a voice-over description.

( Described video service (DVS) provides people who are visually impaired a
voice-over description of a program’s key visual elements with narration that
is inserted during natural pauses in program dialogue. DVS generally presents
actions that are not reflected in the dialogue, such as the movement of a
person in a scene. )
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-29T20:29:17.023
38830
2016-08-29T20:29:17.023
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
16344
25125
answer
Disclaimer: I'm not an grammar expert, but I too was also struggling with
this, and not just with relative clauses. :-)

I think you're mistaking it as future tense, when it's actually the infinitive
tense. My advice would be to compare it (surprisingly) to English:

> While the sun hadn't yet set, we **walk** towards the station.

Vs:

> While the sun hadn't yet set, we **were walking** towards the station.

It seems like in Japanese, just as in English, the preference is to use the
**infinitive** tense (the first sentence) in literature. In conversations,
you'd use the second form.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-28T01:51:46.447
41269
2016-11-28T01:51:46.447
14630
25125
answer
This is still marked unanswered, but two of the above answers are correct. The
most salient point is that 歩いている would draw special attention to the ongoing
action itself, as if to prepare the listener for something that was going to
happen. For example if they were walking and then they noticed something on
the ground.

Also, it feels more literary or "painting a static picture" (rather than
conjuring up a moving picture in the listener's mind) as someone else noted.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-12-18T19:05:59.193
41779
2016-12-18T19:05:59.193
19118
25125
answer
Saying 歩いている俺と加藤 is not wrong at all, but 歩く俺と加藤 looks more vivid and
interesting. This writing style is especially preferred in a script of a
drama, [sport news](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23349/5010), etc.
Sticking to the present tense is one of the fundamental rules of writing a
screenplay, according to [this
page](http://kyakuhonkakikata.com/rulesofscreenplay).

This style is sometimes called [historical
present](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_present) as opposed the past
tense, but the general idea is that the employment of the pure dictionary-form
is an effective way to express something vividly with a "you-are-there"
feeling. Using ている is redundant and can make this sentence a bit dull.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-02-17T15:01:06.450
43622
2017-02-17T15:01:06.450
2017-04-13T12:43:44.863
-1
5010
25125
answer