Bruce, my original response was to this post of yours:


"When I said the imperative was a finite form, I had in mind that there 
was agreement in the form with 1) the person of the subject ("you" 
second, understood), and 2) the tense (always immediate, understood). 
The infinitive doesn't have either person or tense understood.  The 
actual outward form is identical, hence the confusion between form and 
function with the term.  I guess Johanna's metaphor would say we can 
ride the horse or have it pull our wagon, it's still a horse.  In one 
case we ride bareback and it is relatively unbridled, in the other, it 
has to be harnessed up and is more connected.
Bruce"


I guess I have to ask you to define "finite". Also, what is "immediate 
tense"?

My definition of "finite" is "carries a tense marker, whether an overt 
mark or zero". "Nonfinite" means "not marked for tense", not 
"infinitive". Hence participles are nonfinite, but not infinitives.

When does "would" refer to present time?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Associate Professor, Linguistics
English Department, California Polytechnic State University
One Grand Avenue  • San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
Tel. (805)-756-2184  •  Fax: (805)-756-6374 • Dept. Phone.  756-2596
• E-mail: [log in to unmask] •      Home page: 
http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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/