91023
In the comments to [this
question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/90962/%E6%98%8E%E6%97%A5-%E6%9E%97%E3%81%95%E3%82%93%E3%81%AB-%E4%BC%9A%E3%81%86-or-%E4%BC%9A%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8D%E3%81%AB-%E3%81%93%E3%81%AE%E6%9C%AC%E3%82%92%E8%BF%94%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86)
I learnt that

> 明日、林さんに **会う** ときに、この本を返そう

and

> 明日、林さんに **会った** ときに、この本を返そう

have the same meaning, although 会った is more common.

With my current understanding, that the tense in a subordinate clause is
relative to that of the main clause, I would have expected 会った to be the only
correct choice, since I cannot return the book to 林さん before I've met up with
him.

I was advised to post a separate question about this, so here it is. Could
someone please explain how these sentences can have the same meaning and how
it fits in with the [relative tense
rule](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/25378/7944).
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-01T20:48:03.090
91021
2021-12-30T00:40:13.527
2021-11-01T23:34:02.277
43676
7944
question
grammar relative-clauses tense
A counter example to the rule on tense in relative clauses?
Both are indeed correct, but I would understand とき slightly differently in
those two sentences.

林さんに会っ **た** とき refers to a specific point in time. The speaker will be with
Hayashi-san then and he will return the book when that time has come. This is
a typical example of relative tense.

I would understand 林さんに会 **う** とき as referring more to an occasion than a
specific point in time, or, in other words, a longer span of time than in the
sentence with 会った. It sounds like the speaker will return the book taking
advantage of the occasion to go out and meet Hayashi-san.

The probability of him returning the book to someone other than Hayashi-san
seems to increase in this case. He might drop by a library on his way to the
meeting, or meet the owner of the book after the meeting with Hayashi-san is
over. He might as well return the book to Hayashi-san when the two meet, of
course.

I think this can be seen as a case of absolute tense being used in a noun-
modifying clause (recently discussed
[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/90967/43676)), with とき being the
modified noun.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-01T23:32:46.590
91023
2021-12-30T00:40:13.527
2021-12-30T00:40:13.527
43676
43676
91021
answer
I leave practically useful explanations to @aguijonazo's answer.

Linguistically this た does not indicate past tense, but perfect aspect. So
this is outside any tense rule.

For example, [this
article](https://www.u-bunkyo.ac.jp/center/library/image/fsell2007_071-091.PDF)
cites the following:

> 松下（1930）は、「た」は動作性活用の語の第二活段へ附いて完了の意を表すものである。 現在、過去、未来、不拘時の何れにも用ゐられて其の完了を表す。
>
> 1 御覧なさい、綺麗な月が出ました。 現在の完了
>
> 2 私は子どもの時は国に居りました。 過去を完了に表す
>
> 3 借りたものは還さなければならない。 不拘時の事件の完了
>
> 4 明日伺ったらばお目に掛かれましょうか。 未来の事件の完了

The た in the question is the same as 4. The same article seems to discuss
further how to sort out usage of た consistently, but for the current question,
I suppose it is enough to note that た is not necessarily a tense marker.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-02T01:00:37.710
91027
2021-11-02T01:00:37.710
45489
91021
answer