All, Either Brad is a troll - a label that has been posited many times before, or he is obsessed. If he is a troll, continued replies please him no end. If he is obsessed, nothing you write will change his stance. Either way, I would ask that if you are having a dialogue with him about the past perfect (or anything else, for that matter), would you please take it offline? There are many subjects I would like to see discussed, but I'm very, very tired of this one. ~Gretchen On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]>wrote:All, > *STAHLKE, HERBERT F <[log in to unmask]>* wrote: > > > Brad, > > > > Beyond the obvious, give me some context for each of them. > > > > Herb > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > Exactly, Herb. > > IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTEXT, the first sentence is correct and the second > sentence is not. 'He had walked five miles' cannot stand alone. As you > require of me, not surprisingly, it needs context. The first sentence, with > the simple past tense verb, does not need context. The second sentence does > require context. It cannot stand alone. > > Can the first sentence, with the simple past-tense verb, fit into a context > that requires the verb to be changed to past perfect? Of course, of course, > a thousand times of course. > > As Gerald Walton correctly put it, "He walked five miles" means that at > some time in the past he walked five miles. "He had walked five miles" means > that before some specific time in the past, he had walked five miles. > > He goes on to say, What is your problem? Yesterday he walked five miles. > By 4 o'clock yesterday, he had walked five miles. > > The problem is that the second sentence, to be correct, demands an element > of timing, which is not there. Standing alone, as the second sentence does, > there is no timing, there is no context indicating timing, and hence there > is an incorrect sentence, with the word 'had' in front of the > past-tense verb of the first sentence. > > This is the crux of the problem, Gerald. If there is either (a) no > context, as with the second sentence, or (b) context that does *not*compel the use of the past perfect, the use of 'had' + the verb is > incorrect. > > The compelling context can, needless to say, be contained in a sentence or > be outside the sentence. > > Everyone please stand aside while Herb considers this explanation. > > .thanks.brad.28feb10. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > . > *STAHLKE, HERBERT F <[log in to unmask]>* wrote: > > > Brad, > > > > Beyond the obvious, give me some context for each of them. > > > > Herb > > > ------------------------------ > > ** > > *Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]>* wrote: > > > > Herb, > > > > 1.) Please tell me what this sentence means*:* He walked five miles. > > > > 2.) Please tell me what this sentence means*:* He had walked five miles. > > > > .thanks.brad.27feb10. > > > 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/ > -- "You can't wait for inspiration. You have to go after it with a club." --Jack London 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/