Karl,
     Nice points. That means a sentence like "I have broken windows in 
my house" would be fundamentally ambiguous. I hadn't thought of that. 
Nice amendment.
     As a functionalist, I would tend to look at this diachronically. If 
we have forms around, it seems reasonable to expect that they would 
change their range of use, just as words do. Just as the same word can 
have different meanings, a form can evolve different functions.
    Herb could probably correct me on this one, but I think  perfect 
aspect evolved from a causative construction in old English, something 
like "We have the windows broken," somewhat analogous to "they made us 
laugh," where the change in state verb comes after the direct object.  
Word order shifted, and then the form generalized out later to include 
intransitive verbs: "We have broken the windows." "We have laughed."
    I like your formulation of it, and we could propose this as an EBB 
(everyone but Brad) position. "It is useful to separate function and 
form because forms often carry out more than one function. They often 
mean different things in different contexts."

Craig

On 2/17/2011 10:29 PM, Karl Hagen wrote:
> Craig,
>
> I agree with both you and Dick, and I also think this highlights the 
> need to keep the form/function distinction clearly in mind when 
> discussing such things.
>
> Mixing the two up (something traditional grammar does with great 
> frequency) almost always leads to confusion, particularly because when 
> you don't distinguish the two, it fosters the notion that there is 
> precisely one meaning for each form. So, for example, you get the idea 
> that the past tense always refers to past time. Or, conversely, that 
> past time must always be expressed in the past tense.
>
> BTW, one minor quibble, I would want the definition of the perfect as 
> a form to include a mention that "have" must be an auxiliary, since it 
> is possible to construct sentences where a main-verb "have" is 
> followed by a past participle with another function (e.g., a noun 
> modifier), making the sequence has/have/had + past participle merely a 
> fortuitous collocation.
>
> Karl
>
> On 2/17/2011 7:02 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
>> Dick,
>>      You have espoused a position (if I followed it right) that I would
>> fundamentally agree with: that the past perfect is recognizable first
>> and foremost as a form--had plus past participle. And that whether it
>> is being used appropriately or inappropriately, effectively or
>> ineffectively, it remains past perfect, just as a screw driver remains
>> a screw driver even when you use it to poke someone in the eye.
>> Questions about effective use can be thought of as separate from that.
>>
>> Craig>
>>
>>
>> Craig,
>>>
>>> I agree completely, and I look forward to every one of Herb's posts. 
>>> But
>>> people do continue to respond to Brad. If doing the same thing again 
>>> and
>>> again and expecting a different result is insanity, I wonder who is
>>> crazier,
>>> those who keep taking Brad's bait or those (like you and me) who keep
>>> trying
>>> to get others to *stop *taking his bait.
>>>
>>> Dick
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Craig Hancock<[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Dick,
>>>>      The idea for this most recent conversation is to come up with 
>>>> a view
>>>> of
>>>> the past perfect that pleases the rest of us. Whether it pleases 
>>>> Brad is
>>>> not
>>>> important.  It is insanity to expect a conversation with Brad to
>>>> accomplish
>>>> anything new, so our goal should be to discuss it with each other. 
>>>> I am
>>>> looking forward to reading what Herb comes up with. I expect Brad to
>>>> react
>>>> angrily to that, but his response is irrelevant.
>>>>     I may be wrong, but I think reacting to Brad has kept us from a
>>>> productive discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/16/2011 3:51 PM, Dick Veit wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If we would all try just a little harder, explain the past perfect 
>>>> just
>>>> a
>>>> little more clearly, try just one or two or fifty more times to get
>>>> you-know-who to engage in productive dialogue, surely then he will see
>>>> reason and all will be well and we can turn to other topics. We won't
>>>> know
>>>> if we don't try many, many, many more times, will we?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Dick
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Geoffrey Layton
>>>> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>   :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Geoff Layton
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:45:46 -0500
>>>>> From: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: insanity
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different
>>>>> results.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>> interface
>>>> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
>>>> leave the list"
>>>>
>>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>> interface
>>>> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
>>>> leave the list"
>>>>
>>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>>
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web 
>>> interface
>>> at:
>>>       http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web 
>> interface at:
>>       http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web 
> interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/