TJ,
    In "After he had finished the book, he returned it" there are three
ways in which time reference is being established. One is "after" as
subordinating conjunction. Another is "finished," which construes the
reading as over. The third is the past perfect. As alternative,
consider "When he had read the book, he returned it," where all the
weight of time relation falls on the past perfect. "When he read the
book, he returned it" would sound as though both were happening at the
same time. It's not unusual, of course, to have redundancy within the
grammar.
   Here's another example, this time in consecutive sentences. "When my
wife came home, she was in for a great surprise. I had cleaned the
house." The past tense alternative, "I cleaned the house," would imply
that it happened after her return rather than before.

Craig
     >

A fairly direct definition might include what follows:
>
> A succinct explanation of the past perfect tense may be found in
> George Curme’s A Grammar of the English Language.  Curme defines the
> past perfect tense: This form represents a past action or state as
> completed at or before a certain past
> time.  His example is “After he had finished the book, he returned
> it.”  Two actions whose sequence is made explicit by the two tense
> forms.
>
>
> The past tense regularly is found to function with an adverb of time
> instead of a second verb in the the past tense:  The bell had rung
> before midnight last night.
>
>
> The past perfect tense is often found in the progressive form:  The
> bell had been ringing for a long time by midnight.
>
>
> The past perfect tense may be found in both the active and passive
> voices:  The bell had been rung before midnight.  The sexton had rung
> the bell before midnight.
>
>
> These last two possibilities may be found together:  The bell had been
> being rung when he got there.
>
>
> As with the present perfect and the future perfect tenses, the past
> perfect is a device for distinguishing between two points in time.
> The present perfect denotes an event occurring in the recent past:  He
> has graduated by now.  The future perfect deals with an action
> expected to occur prior to a later action or time in the future:  He
> will have graduated by 2012.
>
>
> tj
>
>
>
> On Tuesday 01/04/2011 at 1:07 pm, Craig Hancock   wrote:
>> Herb,
>>        Great plan. There would, I think, be two parts to it--what do
>> we agree
>> to assign the term "past perfect" to (as a form) and how does that
>> form function in discourse. I think it would also help to look at the
>> past perfect at work in a text that most people admire. Maybe I'll
>> take on that part of it.
>>
>> Craig>
>>
>> Craig,
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a good suggestion, that we have a substantive, productive
>>> discussion of the past perfect.  Brad wants a definition that will
>>> work
>>> for a fifth grader, and we've pretty much agreed that a simpler
>>> treatment
>>> works at that level but that such a treatment doesn't work as a
>>> description of a grammatical phenomenon.  The quest for a definition
>>> is
>>> itself part of the problem since what grammarians do is describe
>>> phenomena.  Definitions, to the extent that they are possible and
>>> useful,
>>> have to change over time, and language change is never smooth,
>>> allowing a
>>> neat change to a definition.
>>>
>>> I'll work on a description of the past perfect, considering its
>>> history
>>> and the fact that it's a composite form combining tense and aspect.
>>>
>>> Herb
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 11:58 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: NOT In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv
>>>
>>> Geoff,
>>>          The problem, as I see it, is that we have NOT had a
>>> productive
>>> discussion of the past perfect.  To do so would require taking Brad
>>> out of the equation. He brings up the question, then denounces any
>>> position he doesn't agree with. People get angry and it goes downhill
>>> from there. Brad seems intent on denying center stage to any position
>>> other than his own.
>>>          I'm not sure I would call what he adds "spice." Last time I
>>> was at 4
>>> C's, two people told me they quit the list, citing Brad. We are losing
>>> people, and unfortunatly, people who are themselves teachers, not just
>>> gadflys.
>>>
>>> Craig>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There's more than a little irony in this discussion about the need for
>>>> list moderation, presumably due to our past perfect friend (PPF -
>>>> that's to be dinstinguished from a BFF). The irony, quite simply, is
>>>> that said friend generates more discussions about topics both
>>>> important and quaint than just about anybody else, so if we kissed PPF
>>>> goodbye, the number of postings would drop dramatically. If you don't
>>>> like the past perfect discussions, don't participate - and if you want
>>>> to talk about something else, then serve up something that the group
>>>> will find more interesting than the past perfect! Besides, our PPF
>>>> adds a certain amount of shall we say spice to the conversation -
>>>> after
>>>> all, he got this topic going!
>>>>
>>>> Geoff Layton
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 21:58:39 -0500
>>>> From: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Linguist List works as a moderated list only because it is funded
>>>> by grants and by contributions from its user community so that it is
>>>> able to hire and train graduate students to do monitoring and various
>>>> other support tasks.  I remember when it was not moderated, and it was
>>>> prone to the sorts of problems we're talking about now.  While
>>>> LinguistList is an invaluable source of information for the
>>>> profession, I do miss the free exchange of ideas, in spite of the
>>>> occasional bad manners.
>>>>
>>>> We can always delete or block postings from particular participants if
>>>> we wish, but, much as I dislike the occasional tone discussions have
>>>> taken here I would regret to see the list moderated, even minimally.
>>>> It is unfortunate that some choose not to participate because of that
>>>> occasional unpleasantness, but writing teachers, language arts
>>>> teachers, linguists, grammarians, editors, etc. are all prone to the
>>>> same fits of temper and bad manners as the rest of the population.
>>>> Blocking the extremes unfortunately also blocks the occasional very
>>>> interesting thought.  A civil society deserves that adjective only
>>>> because it tolerates the odd incivility.
>>>>
>>>> Herb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul E. Doniger
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 5:39 PM
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would second Dick's suggestion; however, the problem, I think, would
>>>> be to find someone to do the moderating.  As I understand it, this can
>>>> be a time consuming task on some lists (perhaps not quite so bad on
>>>> ATEG), and I suspect there isn't enough money to hire a moderator.
>>>> Any
>>>> suggestions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> "If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an
>>>> improbable fiction" (_Twelfth Night_ 3.4.127-128).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Dick Veit <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Sent: Mon, January 3, 2011 4:23:38 PM
>>>> Subject: In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv
>>>>
>>>> This listserv is currently unmoderated and entirely unrestricted in
>>>> content, allowing anyone to post anything whatever and relying solely
>>>> on occasional appeals to participants' better natures to preserve
>>>> civility.
>>>> At the same time many have lamented that the listserv has lost
>>>> membership because of the online behavior of one or two persons. Some
>>>> repeatedly try to persuade those individuals to act better, even in
>>>> the face of abundant evidence that all previous such efforts have had
>>>> exactly the opposite effect.
>>>>
>>>> I favor a lightly moderated listserv, with a published set of
>>>> minimally restrictive standards and intervention by a moderator only
>>>> in the rarest, most egregious, and most persistent violations of those
>>>> standards.
>>>>
>>>> The argument for non-moderation is that academic discourse should be
>>>> an open marketplace, with all ideas free to compete without
>>>> restriction imposed on the basis of orthodoxy or popularity. I agree
>>>> completely. No one should ever be excluded from this listserv because
>>>> their ideas are unorthodox or unpopular or considered discredited. We
>>>> can all cite ideas once considered crackpot that are today's
>>>> paradigms.
>>>>
>>>> Openness is but one of two essential factors in a functioning
>>>> marketplace of ideas. The other is dialogue. Ideas must be exchanged
>>>> and
>>>> debated.
>>>> People who propose ideas must be willing to defend them and to respond
>>>> to reasonable objections to their arguments. People must also feel
>>>> free to engage in debate with others without fear that by so doing
>>>> they will be subject to personal attacks or harassment.
>>>>
>>>> Some proponents of an unmoderated list might argue that any
>>>> restrictions, no matter how reasonable or minimal, would create the
>>>> slippery slope to totalitarianism, and that we have no choice but to
>>>> suffer bad behavior even if it means members flee the list in droves.
>>>> I would argue that reasonable people can draw a reasonable line, and
>>>> that standards would in fact preserve rather than stifle discussion
>>>> and
>>>> dialogue.
>>>>
>>>> Standards, as I said, should be minimal. You may propose or discuss
>>>> any ideas within the broad framework of teaching grammar and (even
>>>> broader) language in general. You may disagree with, challenge, or
>>>> even express antipathy or respond sarcastically toward the ideas of
>>>> others, but you may not attack other members personally, or ridicule,
>>>> intimidate, or harass them (on or off list). You must be willing to
>>>> engage in debate and to respond to reasonable challenges to the ideas
>>>> you express. You may not shout the same assertions over and over
>>>> without ever explaining or defending them.
>>>>
>>>> The moderator's job would be to do very little. In the face of
>>>> egregious violations of these standards, the moderator should
>>>> privately remind the offender of the standards. If the first
>>>> admonition goes unheeded, the moderator should issue a second reminder
>>>> with a warning. If that too fails, the moderator may remove the
>>>> offender from the listserv. How do we safeguard against abuse by the
>>>> moderator? We must assume that a reasonable person can apply
>>>> reasonable standards. We can direct that the moderator notify the list
>>>> of any removal (quoting the prior warnings issued) and hold off if
>>>> there
>>>> is considerable opposition.
>>>>
>>>> If I have learned anything from this listserv over the years it is
>>>> that some people make a sport of disrupting listservs. No social
>>>> pressure will ever moderate their behavior--in fact, provoking such a
>>>> reaction is exactly what they most enjoy. Only the threat of removal
>>>> will have an effect.
>>>>
>>>> And now anyone is free to oppose (or second) my proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Dick
>>>> 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/ 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/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/ 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/
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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/
>>>
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>> 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/
>
>
> 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/
>

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/