What if I ask John, "Where have you lived in your lifetime?" Seems to me
that "I've lived in Nashville," as well as "I've lived in Nashville and
Amarillo" are good (ie acceptable, understandable, even accurate)
answers, even if he stopped living in Nashville a long time ago. One of
the ways I learned tenses was with this progression:
Today I ________ (i.e. live in Nashville--simple present)
Yesterday I __________ (lived in Amarillo--simple past)
In my lifetime I ______________ (have lived in Nashville, Amarillo, and
several other places--past perfect)
This teaches that "simple past" is not the same as "past perfect,"
because the uses for "past perfect" are not simple--they're kind of
complicated--they require thinking about time in/on several different
levels. This gets really philosophically interesting, I think, as
language always does of course when we're translating between languages
and looking at how various linguistic constructions reflect different
kinds of thinking about all kinds of issues, like identity and otherness
and time and so on.
But the bottom line, for me, when I'm trying to coach my students in
effective creative and argumentative writing, is context and audience.
If the audience will be confused (as perhaps Brad is, perversely or
not), my students need to know options for alleviating that confusion.
And one thing I see far too often is that even in college, students
don't know their options. I like to think a short progression like the
one above can help them see some differences between tenses, without a
lot of stiff-handed rule-mongering.
Onward and upward!
Julie
>>> "Brad Johnston" <[log in to unmask]> 08/21/10 8:36 AM >>>
John,
I regret your distress. Maybe it will help if you realize that I
responded to
exactly what Jack wrote to me.
For something "in return", note that if your students understand, really
understand, these three lines, they will know most, maybe all, of what
they need
to know about the present perfect and the past perfect.
John lived in Nashville for 10 years (but now lives in Amarillo).
John has lived in Nashville for ten years (and still does).
When John moved to Amarillo, he had lived in Nashville for 10 years.
.brad.21aug10.
________________________________
From: John Eleen <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 7:08:37 PM
Subject: Re: House & Harman on the present perfect
As he doesn't define his "view" anywhere in his rants, offering nothing
new, I
don't see the point. Am I missing something here? Who cares what this
guy
"thinks."
Where's the authority that he bases his understanding upon, and that he
insists
everyone else take up.
Brad asserts knowledge when he has none. His rants shows his
epistemological
absurdity so very well.
Case in point: "no one knows what the future holds."
"They had no business including the present perfect in a grammar text" -
Says
someone who offers nothing in return. If you criticize someone's
understanding,
then it's your obligation to provide a replacement understanding( read-
Define).
As Brad fails to do so, H & H is just as good (if not better) then any
of his
rants.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Brad Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>Jack, you need to be set for html or this will be a mess.
>
>Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: "Grammar Blast"
>
>Brad:
>
>After perusing this discussion, I went back to my college grammar book:
Homer C.
>House and Susan Emolyn Harman’s Descriptive English Grammar, 2nd
edition,
>1950. Let me quote from House and Harman regarding the use of the
perfect
>tenses:
>
>The perfect tenses represent the action of the verb as completed at a
present, a
>past, or a future time.
>
>Whatever does this mean? I think it's what's called, "covering all the
bases"
>
>The word perfected means completed*; hence the present pe
rfect tense
denotes
>action completed at the time the speake>"Voila. It's done. I have finished the job"? Maybe so. Otherwise,
absent the
>hammer throw, "I finished the job", five minutes ago, an hour ago, last
week, on
>the third Thursday of last November, whenever. If it's "finished", it's
over,
>completed, done, H & H, even if it's right now.
>
>*I think this idea/concept/explanation of "perfected = completed" gives
a lot of
>people a lot of trouble and does not help in understanding what needs
to be
>understood. It certainly confuses students. We should not say it when
we expect
>anyone to be paying attention. It doesn't help.
>
>Later in the chapter in the section on the uses of the various tenses,
the
>writers explain the following ways in which the present perfect is
used: The
>present perfect tense lays stress upon the completion of an action at
>the time when the speaker expresses the thought. How peculiar.
>
>Like the present tense, the present perfect has extended its meanings
and
>functions somewhat beyond the perfection (perfection? That's a perfume,
right?)
>of an act in the present. It may indicate any of the following time
meanings:
>
>1.) An act just completed, often with the help of an accompanying
modifier: [For
>example,] The doctor has just arrived.Is this better than "The doctor
just
>arrived"? except that present-day speakers and writers do like to put,
>unnecessarily, 'has' or 'have' or 'had' in front of all kinds of verbs.
>
>2.) An action beginning in the past and continuing into the future.
This should
>read, into the present, since noone knows what the future holds. [For
example,]
>He has lived in my apartment for over a year... and he still does.
Bravo! But he
>may not live there tomorrow. No promises, landlord.
>
>3.) An action completed at anytime before the present. = the job of the
past
>tense. [For example,] The director <has appointed> appointed the
committees, and
>they are studying these problems. [And] <Have I not seen> Did I not see
you
>elsewhere? (120-21) Nice shots, H & H, but no basket.
>
>
>If we return to the sentence about our dear friend Mia, does the
present perfect
>not fit under condition #3 above? Since #3 above is incorrect, it's
going to be
>hard to hang anything on it. Mia did her part in the past. If she is
still doing
>her part as the speaker speaks, the speaker should say, "Mia is doing
her part
>.."
>
>Which verb or verb phrase correctly completes this sentence?
>Mia ____ her part in raising money for the team uniforms.
>
>Also, wouldn’t has done be grammatically possible because it could
indicate
>“action completed at the time the speaker is making his statement”? see
above.
>
>In their lengthy discussion of the various tenses, House and Harman
clearly
>state that “[t]here is considerable overlapping of the functions of the
tenses”
>(118). This is the sort of blanket amnesty that a linguist would throw
over the
>proceedings, so I'll bet you diamonds to dung thatHouse and Harmon
are/were
>linguists. Many and strange are the things people actually say and
write, e.g,
>"Where is you been at?", but such utterances have nothing to do with
the
>Teaching of English Grammar, which is what ATEG stands for. (For an
interesting
>and cogent analysis of whether and how grammar should be taught, see
Craig
>Hancock & Martha Kolln in Chapter 2 of "Beyond The Grammar Wars",
c.2010)
>
>I believe both House and Harman were grammarians, not the firebrand
linguists
>you refer to.
>
>How is my understanding of House and Harman wrong? Your understanding
of their
>text is O.K. Their understanding of the tense is not O.K. They cannot
explain a
>consistent pattern that makes sense. They had no business including the
present
>perfect in a grammar text. Or in what ways are their ideas about the
present
>perfect wrong? What are the condition(s) under which we can use the
present
>perfect tense?
>
>Further, from my archives r
e H of H & H:
>
>
>Susan Emolyn Harman's, Descriptive En>The past perfect tense represents an action as completed at a past
time.
>Nonsense: I went to the store yesterday.It may denote that an action
occurred at
>an indefinite or definite time in the past.
>
>He <had signed> signed the contract before he left for Europe.
>
>It <had been snowing> snowed all day.
>
>This is Exhibit #70+ to my assertion that there is at least one past
perfect
>error on any grammar website or in any grammar textbook you can name.
(I even
>found one hiding in the 1,242 pages of Huddleston & Pullum, believe it
or not.)
>
>Challenges gladly accepted, even solicited.
>
> .brad.14apr08.
>
>There are past perfect errors in examples on (at least) pages 216, 248,
249,
>255, 342, 386, 387, 393, 405, and 410 of Harman's Descriptive English
Grammar.
>See for yourself.
>
>H & H don't get it, Jack. Caveat Emptor.
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/
|
