Johanna,
   I think this is not a case of suddenly relaxing a rule as it is a
matter of someone inventing a rule that never belonged to the language
in the first place. I think Brad is treating past participle as if it
were carrying past tense, so that "had walked" is a mistake because
"had" can't come before a past tense verb. It's hard to tell, though,
because none of his examples or explanations have been clear.
   From a cognitive perspective, of course, a rule is much more a pattern,
and we sometimes accomplish great things by breaking those patterns and
stretching the capacity of the language. Change is often well
motivated.

Craig

Brad and other "correctionists" worry about "bad grammar," but we
> need to keep in mind that language changes, and tense/aspect systems
> change. It is very hard to stop linguistic change. Some changes may
> lessen the communicative effectiveness of the language, but context
> usually resolves this. We have to remember that human communities
> have invented their languages and will not allow them to decline to
> the point of nonfunctionality -- communication is too vital to human
> society. As I always insist, language is a reflection of thinking; if
> language degenerates, it is because thinking degenerates. A society
> will have a language that satisfies its needs and desires, and
> reflects its thinking habits.
>
> People sometimes claim that grammar improves thinking, but I think
> this is not so much because grammar introduces "better" thought
> patterns, but because, as a pursuit, it cultivates analytical habits
> of mind, and that is what improves thinking. Also, like other
> analytical pursuits, it reveals to the student the complexities of
> world phenomena that we take for granted, thus enriching the
> student's knowledge base and encouraging analytical thinking about
> other topics. Those of my students who don't mind linguistics often
> make remarks reflecting the latter effect.
>
> If we want subtle tense/aspect systems, why not introduce some from
> other languages that make more distinctions than English? How would
> that be different from trying to prop up a distinction that is
> possibly dying or changing? Are we as English speakers poorer
> thinkers because we have fewer tense/aspect distinctions than
> speakers of other languages?
>
> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D.
> Associate Professor, Linguistics
> Linguistics Minor Advisor
> English Dept.
> Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
> Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184
> Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596
> Dept. fax: 805-756-6374
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> URL: 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/
>

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/