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/