ATEG Archives

January 2011

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 5 Jan 2011 01:12:17 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Just for transparency, I'm retitling this "Past Perfect:  structure and function."



Herb







-----Original Message-----

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of STAHLKE, HERBERT F

Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 11:39 PM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: NOT In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv



It's not unusual across languages for a verb meaning "finish" to take on an aspectual function and even grammaticalize as an aspectual.  In Yoruba, something like this is happening.  In a serial verb construction like



O ti she tan  (spelling modified for ASCII and tone marks omitted) He/she perfect do/work finish "He/she has finished."



"ti" is strictly aspectual and marks perfect.  "she" is a verb meaning "do/work."  "tan" is a verb meaning "finish."  In English, "finish" is semantically and aspectual verb but hasn't grammaticalized as such, like begin, start, stop, cease, continue, keep, etc.  Aspect as a category has grammaticalized to some verbs in English, like Have and be, and not with others, like those in the previous sentence.



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 9:59 PM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: NOT In support of a (minimally) moderated listserv



TJ,

    I was thinking about "When I finished [reading]the book, I returned it to the library." I think perfect aspect gives a sense of completion and verbs like "finished" or "completed" work in the same territory.

But I agree: "had finished" would make it more explicit.



Craig>



Craig,

> Your first and third points are fine.  I disagree about "finished"

> because by itself it does not separate the two events in time.

>

> tj

>

>

>

> On Tuesday 01/04/2011 at 7:02 pm, Craig Hancock   wrote:

>> 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/

>

>

> 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/




ATOM RSS1 RSS2