Exist always or always exists

Question

While reading about the simple present I came across a sentence describing the subject. It read as followed:

“In sum, the simple present is used for events and situations that exist always, usually, or habitually in the past, present, and future.”

My first question of two is; in the case of the phrase, “exist always”, does the meaning or tense change if you switch the order of the two words? Second, was the phrase “exist always” placed first in the tense groups to sum up the entire meaning for the rest of the group and for simple present? I’m curious because it all seems to be the same thing in that instant..

Answer 1

Question #1. You would typically say always exist. However, in this case, it is placed after the verb because it is supposed to be part of the list: always, usually, or habitually.

Question #2. I don't understand what you're saying. What phrase? exist always? What group? Could you please rewrite the question to make it a bit clearer to understand?