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/