Johanna,
    We don't say "had would", but we do say "would have " plus past 
participle.  ("Every day when he arrived, she would have finished the 
inventory...")  and of course "would be ....ing". "When mom was in the 
kitchen, I would be sitting there doing my homework..."
If would is an aspectual marker, it is independent of perfect and 
progressive. This is, of course, true of all the modals. (It  does seem 
to denote the habitual, which is true of  most present tense forms as 
well.  I still think we get the same sense for past with "used to" and 
"could").
    The point I wanted to make is that we could agree on exactly what 
"would" does, but disagree on how to classify it depending on what we 
use to define these classes. To me, the easiest way through is to call 
it a modal and then admit that it has aspectual meanings when used in 
reference to past time.  But I would stop short of saying that's the 
"right" way to do it. If you think that any word that has an aspectual 
function can't be a  modal, then you would be right to give it its own 
special class. The important thing, I think, is thoughtfulness and 
consistency.

Craig

Johanna Rubba wrote:

> It's hard to classify aspectual "would". It only occurs in the past 
> tense, so there is no opportunity to test it for 3rd-person present. 
> And expressions like "had would" (cf. "had eaten") don't occur. 
> "Is/was willing" has nothing to do with habits. I don't detect any 
> trace of either deontic or epistemic meaning in this use of "would"; 
> it simply describes a past habit factually. The fact that sentences 
> with it are ambiguous out of context has no impact on the analysis; 
> that is true of any homonym.
>
> I'm not sure why, but I think of the past-habitual "would" as coming 
> from the past tense of "will". We project future habits with "will", 
> though this appears not to be a special case; it's just the usual 
> future: "When I move to the Virgin Islands, I will go sailing every 
> day." The origin might be traceable or commented on in reference works.
>
>  Paul's questions about "used to:
>
> 1. Isn't this a replacement for the old verb, 'wont', as in "He was 
> wont to do it."?
>
> This is unlikely, since "use" as a verb for habits was in use at the 
> same period as "wont to do it".
>   
> 2. Why do we use the past form even in present expressions ("I am used 
> to it.")? The same is also true with 'supposed to', which students 
> almost always mis-write as present in form.
>
> We don't.  The "used" of "I am used to it" is participial; "used to 
> it" is a subject complement modifying "I".  We never use "use" in the 
> present tense to reflect habits:
>
> 1. *I use to run every day. (We say "I run every day"; simple present 
> tense is the habitual aspect marker for non-state verbs.)
>
> Future is also impossible:
>
> 2. *When I move to the Virgin Islands, I will use to sail every day."
>
> When we negate, the tense marker moves, as it should, to the AUX:
>
> 3. You didn't use to drink so much.
> 4. (British) You usedn't to drink so much.
> 5. You used not to drink so much.
>
> If I recall correctly, Huddleston & Pullum refer to spelling confusion 
> in cases like this, so that some people write "usen't to" and some 
> write "didn't used to". This is perfectly logical, given that the verb 
> has fossilized -- people aren't sure how to spell it, because it is no 
> longer functioning regularly.
>
> As to "I am supposed to", I imagine this has its origin in a passive 
> (people suppose that I will ... ), in which case it is again not a 
> past form. It's a participle.
>  
> Johanna Rubba, Assoc. Prof., Linguistics
> Linguistics Minor Advisor
> English Department
> Cal Poly State University
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93047
> Tel. 805.756.2184
> Dept. Tel. 805.756.6374
> Home page:
> http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
> 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/