From: Eduard Hanganu <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Fri, December 24, 2010 7:49:52 AM
Subject: Re: Despain, Mastering the Challenge

>> Brad,
 
>> I know what the past perfect is,
 
Fine. Let's see it.
 
>> and I understand its value on the time axis.
 
Fine. Let's see it.

>> I use it in a couple of languages 
 
You haven't yet demonstrated it in English
 
>> I can also define it,
 
Fine. Let's see it.

>> but what difference would it make to you?
 
Lots, Eduard. You think I have nothing better to do than grapple with 
a defensive grammarian? Hardly.
 
>> You are not a believer.
 
I believe in the obvious results of a 10-year inquiry into the nature and extent 
of the misuse of 'had' in contemporary English.
 
>> I am not peevish.
 
Resipsa Loquitur.
 
>> I am just tired of your endless repetitions of the same ignorant affirmations 
>>on the tenses in English.
 
If you're tired, hit the 'delete' button. I'll miss you. You're interesting and 
good fun until you get peevish.
 
>> You need to do a little reading before you can make some relevant 
>conversation.
 
I have read more than you will ever read on the subject.
 
>> Quirk and Comrie's books are not diversions from the topic. They contain 
>>information that might improve your understanding of the English tenses.
 
Fine. Let's see it ... or direct me to page numbers or sections. I stand by 
"Quirk won't help you."
 
>> Happy Holidays!
 
>> Eduard 
 
"No offense intended"
 
.brad.24dec10.
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, December 23, 2010 20:29
Subject: Re: Despain, Mastering the Challenge
To: [log in to unmask]

> Eduard is peevish because I asked him, after a number of 
> pleasant and 
> interesting exchanges, to define the past perfect. He can't do 
> it. He doesn't 
> know what it is. That makes him cross. (If you can do 
> it, Eduard, do it. Don't 
> rant at me. Just do it.)
>  
> I then asked him to ask each person in one of his classes to 
> send me a 
> definition, without him explaining what it is. I don't want to 
> read 30 
> variations on what he tells them. Make it open book. Let them 
> look it up if they 
> want.
>  
> He won't do that either, so he sends out a spleen-gram, and he 
> drops Quirk's 
> name as a smoke screen but Quirk won't help him. How's that for 
> a definitive 
> statement? Quirk won't help.
>  
> Please prove me wrong, Eduard. Maybe the others will help you. 
> Who has Quirk 
> handy?
>  
> .brad.23dec10.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Eduard Hanganu <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wed, December 22, 2010 7:41:35 AM
> Subject: Re: Bruce Despain, Mastering the Challenge
> 
> 
> Brad,
> 
> This is my example:
> 
> "I HAD BEEN READING [ Past Perfect Tense Progressive Aspect] 
> your rumblings for 
> too long before I DECIDED  [ Absolute Simple Past Tense ] 
> that they were not 
> worth my time."
> 
> This is a proper use of the Progressive Past Perfect Tense 
> (Aspect) and of the 
> (Absolute) Simple Past Tense on the time axis. See Quirk et al. 
> in "A 
> Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language," and Comrie in 
> "Aspect."  
> 
> 
> 
> Eduard 
> 
> 
>       
> 



      

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/