>> I know what the past perfect is,
Fine. Let's see it.
>> and I understand its value on the time axis.
>> I use it in a couple of languages
You haven't yet demonstrated it in English
>> I can also define 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
>
>
>
>