ATEG Archives

April 2008

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Veit, Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:28:13 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2680 bytes) , text/html (10 kB)
Brad,

 

I agree that "was" would imply they were still married at the time of
the testimony, but saying that they had been married leaves it
unspecified whether or not they were married when the deputy testified.
For example, you could say, "She knew he had been married at the time of
their prior meeting, but she was uncertain whether he was still
married." 

 

Dick

________________________________

Richard Veit
Department of English
University of North Carolina Wilmington

________________________________

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad Johnston
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: compelled by context

 

"Michael Williams, 32, was scheduled to die last year for a 1993 rape,
robbery and murder. Instead, he will get a new hearing because an
investigator found that the forewoman of his jury had been married to a
deputy sheriff who testified against him."

The Question: was the forewoman married to the deputy sheriff at the
time of the trial?

 

The Answer: The way it is worded, that the forewoman had been married to
the deputy sheriff, they were not married at the time of the deputy's
testimony.

 

Had it been worded that the forewoman was married to the deputy sheriff,
they were married at the time of the testimony.

 

In either case, their relationship would have been ruled prejudicial but
it is doubtful the writer of the Post item made a conscious decision,
one way or the other. He or she was probably just settling for routine
bad grammar.

 

This can serve as a partial reply to someone who questioned what I meant
when I wrote that unless timing sequence is indicated in the sentence,
or compelled by context, there can be no past perfect. He asked what
does, "compelled by context", mean?

 

If the writer wanted it known that the forewoman had been married to the
deputy but was not married at the time of the trial, such context would
compel the tense of the verb as it was written.

 

I have a better example of compelled-by-context for you.

 

.brad.22apr08.

  

________________________________

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
it now.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62
sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ%20>  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/


ATOM RSS1 RSS2