I disagree with Johanna about the characteristic of the perfect tense.
Although it does coincide with completed or finished action in many
sentences, what about such sentences as "I have worked hard all my life,"
"She has lived here for a year"?  Although the tense says something about
the relation of past action to the present, its trademark should not be the
idea of completion.

Linguists and some early grammarians, such as Lindley Murray, have
recognized (notice the "have" that I just used does not imply that their
recognizing is over and done with) the more consistent feature of the
perfect tense.  It places an action in a period of time that started in the
past but that is felt to be recent, connected to the present, and may still
be continuing.  "I have worked hard all my life" and "He has finished his
dinner" both show that the speaker, while referring to different lengths of
time, considers a past time which is connected to the present moment. (The
finishing of the dinner was certainly recent, in relation to the moment of
speaking.) Within this prior but connected period, an action may have been
completed, or it may still be going on.

Ironically, the tense that DOES indicate that an action is completed,
finished, and part of a separate, more distant past, is the plain ole past
tense itself, with no "have" in sight.  "I worked hard all my life" means I
am retired now.  Compare "She has lived here ten years" which means she
still does, with "She lived here ten years" which means her living here is
finished, part of a past unconnected to the present.

Our false definition of the perfect tense is, I think, a serious flaw in
conventional grammar.  Blame William Lily, who in 1510 translated the Latin
perfect tense (which does show completed action) with have.  HIs grammar
book was so influential with English royalty and English education that we
are still stuck with his mistake.  He should have translated the Latin
perfect with the English plain past but grammarians at the time got their
heads pretty turned around trying to match English to Latin grammar.
Clearly, to me at least, "He has loved her" can mean either that he still
does or that he recently stopped, depending on the context; but "He loved
her" is unambiguous--it's over.

May I plug my book, Revising the Rules: Traditional Grammar and Modern
Linguistics (Kendall/Hunt)?

I hope many people who had not thought about coming to the ATEG conference
in a couple of weeks are reconsidering. Take a road trip, grab a flight.  We
can continue all these good discussions, and I am looking forward to talking
about the plans for the year ahead in ATEG.

Brock Haussamen
Raritan Valley Community College
[log in to unmask]