Brad,
Dick gives an excellent example of past
perfect with a remote past meaning, and Craig makes the point well that the
meaning of remote past and the interpretation of a past perfect form are
subjective. This is true of most areas of language. “A lot”
can quantify a teaspoon of salt if it’s poured on one fried egg, but it
can also apply to fifty tons of salt in a highway department storage
barn. As I’ve said before of your putative incorrect examples of “had,”
it all depends on context.
Your statement that people mistakenly use “had”
before past tense verbs, that they change past tense irregular verbs to past
participles after “had,” are not empirically testable statements.
There is no way to know or test the writer’s intentions. Your
statement that those weak verbs after what you claim are incorrect “had”
are functionally past tense depends of a meaning for “functionally”
that is unlike the way any grammarian or linguist uses the term. It is a
subjective judgment of yours that apparently no one else is able to replicate
consistently.
Herb
From:
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010
10:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Herb's remote past,
continued
STAHLKE, HERBERT F <[log in to unmask]>
wrote: Of course, the fact that remote past was
a possible meaning for “had” eight centuries ago doesn’t
mean that it is in the 21st c., but the usage has such a long,
continuous, and consistent history that I find it difficult to fault it. - - - - - - - - Herb, I understand
that you don't fault the use of 'had' to mean the 'remote' past but
what is the 'remote past'? That was my question to you. What is
it? And whatever it is, is it something that those who teach English
grammar should teach? I think 'the past'
is past. Everything from the beginning of time until this moment is
"past". If you think grammar teachers should teach something called
'the remote past', I hope you will illustrate how you think
it works, within the context of 'Standard English', which is what is
taught, and hopefully learned, at this time in the history of the
English-speaking world. I talked to
him an hour ago. I talked to him yesterday. I talked to him a
week ago. I talked to him two weeks ago. I had talked to
him three weeks ago? because everything longer ago that two weeks ago is
'remote past'? Or is everything before the Battle of Hastings 'remote'? or
before the birth of Christ? When did it stop being 'remote' and
start being 'past'? Please tell me what
'remote past' means and how it works. And, importantly, illustrate it,
if you please. .brhad.26feb10. |
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/
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/