Herb wrote: There is no empirical way to show that “walked” in “He had walked five miles” is a past tense form. That’s not the sort of mistake native speakers or proficient non-native speakers make.
My two questions are in direct response to what you see above. The two questions were and are and will be for Herb, not for you. If you would pay attention to what is written and what is in direct response to it, you would not annoy yourself.
When he replies to the response to his first sentence above, I will have a query about his second sentence above, so brace yourself.
.brhad.sun.28feb10.
--- On Sat, 2/27/10, Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: He walked five miles
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 11:27 PM
Herb (and anybody else for that matter) - Will you please tell me why you respond, have responded, had responded, will respond, will have responded, might respond, (or any other conjugation of respond that comes to mind) to these idiotic requests by Mr. Johnson? I thought I had put him on my reject list, but for some reason Hotmail has started to accept him again. Help!
Geoff Layton
PS TO MR JOHSON: What will it take to make you stop? I'm reminded of the kids who pound on their plastic trash can drums in front of the Art Institute, or the god-awful musicians who make a worse noise than the subway trains - I want to ask them, "How much to get you to stop?!"
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 20:05:55 -0800
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: He walked five miles
To: [log in to unmask]
Herb,
1.) Please tell me what this sentence means: He walked five miles.
2.) Please tell me what this sentence means: He had walked five miles.
.thanks.brad.27feb10.
--- On Fri, 2/26/10, STAHLKE, HERBERT F <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: STAHLKE, HERBERT F <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Herb's remote past, Veit
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Friday, February 26, 2010, 10:09 PM
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377
ecx_filtered #ecxyiv923614377
{font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377
#ecxyiv923614377 p.ecxMsoNormal, #yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 li.ecxMsoNormal, #yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 div.ecxMsoNormal
{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman';}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 a:link, #yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 span.ecxMsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 a:visited, #yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 span.ecxMsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 p
{margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman';}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 span.ecxEmailStyle19
{font-family:Arial;color:navy;}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass ecx_filtered #ecxyiv923614377
{}
#yiv718982699 .ExternalClass #ecxyiv923614377 div.ecxSection1
{}
I will state again what has been stated a number of times on these threads, that past and past participle forms are distinct in English only strong verbs and a few mixed strong/weak verbs, like dive/dove/dived. Historically, weak verbs had a distinction between past and past participle, but that was lost by the end of Middle English so that in Modern English the same form serves both purposes. When people write “had walked” in sentences that you reject as using “had” before a past tense verb, you are simply misinterpreting “walked,” a weak verb, as a past tense form rather than as a past participle form. The error exists only if you insist on confusing these forms. There is no empirical way to show that “walked” in “He had walked five miles” is a past tense form. That’s not the sort of mistake native speakers or proficient non-native speakers make.
Herb
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad Johnston
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Herb's remote past, Veit
Herb wrote:
Your statement that people mistakenly use “had” before past tense verbs, that they change past tense irregular verbs to past participles after “had,” are not empirically testable statements.
- - - - - - - - - -
You lump together two quite different things. The first, that people put 'had' in front of past tense verbs, is empirically testable. The second, trying to put 'had' in front of an irregular past tense verb and forcing the irregular past participle, is not, as you point out, testable, because we cannot divine intent. But my explanation for the observable phenomenon is the best I have been able to find, without the further help I have solicited repeatedly.
People DO put 'had' in front of past tense verbs. This is easily demonstrable. How they get to a similar result with irregular past tense verbs SEEMS to be that they first try to do what they think appropriate, put 'had' in front of the verb. When that doesn't work -- almost anyone rejects 'had ate' -- they go to 'had eaten' and that sounds right, so they use it.
How else does this happen? I <had eaten> ate all the tofu before you returned. (Complete Idiot's Guide to Grammar and Style)
I am accumulating a file of examples of 'forcing the irregular past participle', if anyone is interested. All of the examples are from newspapers, novels, and even grammar texts. They are not made up. Let me know if you're interested. Maybe someone can help me understand why it happens if my tentative theory proves to be inadequate.
.brhad.26feb10.
- - - - - - - - - -
There is no way to know or test the writer’s intentions. Your statement that those weak verbs after what you claim are incorrect “had” are functionally past tense depends of a meaning for “functionally” that is unlike the way any grammarian or linguist uses the term. It is a subjective judgment of yours that apparently no one else is able to replicate consistently.
Herb
--- On Fri, 2/26/10, Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
=> I do not now assault the past perfect, nor have I ever assaulted the past perfect in the past, not do I expect to assault the past perfect in the future.
I have assaulted, and do assault, and will in the future assault ...
1.) putting 'had' in front of past tense verbs.
2.) trying to put 'had' in front of an irregular past tense verb and forcing the irregular past participle.
3.) using 'had been' where 'was' and 'were' belong.
.brhad.26feb10.
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/
|
