4 ms·

I wish I knew what Brad Johnston’s idea for correct English pluperfect construction was. The article doesn’t explain it, and reading his comments on other websi

by egwynn 12y ago

I wish I knew what Brad Johnston’s idea for correct English pluperfect construction was. The article doesn’t explain it, and reading his comments on other websites doesn’t give me a good “ground-up” explanation, it only points out where other people are wrong.

joshuaheard 12y ago
I'm not sure, but I think it is that where a verb itself refers to a past activity, like develop, putting it in the past tense then adding a modifier is a triple whammy, making it ungrammatical.
- adekok 12y ago
  The past tense is for a past activity. The past perfect tense is more complicated. From an online ref: http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html "With Non-Continuous Verbs and some non-continuous uses of Mixed Verbs, we use the Past Perfect to show that something started in the past and continued up until another action in the past." Which is a more precise statement than it was just in the past. Languages are full of such corner cases. I was once asked by a non-native English speaker what the differences were between the following phrases: * I went to the store * I was going to the store * I have gone to the store * I had gone to the store * I had been going to the store * I have been going to the store All of the phrases refer to actions in the past. The differences between the phrases indicate where it was a past event that was one-off, or continuous, or whether it started in the past and continued to the present, or started in the past and ended in the past. Language tenses exist for a reason. Simply denying them is delusional, IMHO.
- panglott 12y ago
  He's confusing the simple past verb form and the participle. In the English weak verbs, they look identical, but they are used in different tense/aspect/voice structures. Simple Past: He developed. He drank water. Participle: He has developed. He has drunk water. Claiming that it's ungrammatical in standard English to form a present/past perfect tense/aspect with a helper verb plus the participle...! It's nonsense of the highest order. This is epic-level peevery.

by egwynn 12y ago

joshuaheard 12y ago

I'm not sure, but I think it is that where a verb itself refers to a past activity, like develop, putting it in the past tense then adding a modifier is a triple whammy, making it ungrammatical.

adekok 12y ago
The past tense is for a past activity. The past perfect tense is more complicated. From an online ref: http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastperfect.html "With Non-Continuous Verbs and some non-continuous uses of Mixed Verbs, we use the Past Perfect to show that something started in the past and continued up until another action in the past." Which is a more precise statement than it was just in the past. Languages are full of such corner cases. I was once asked by a non-native English speaker what the differences were between the following phrases: * I went to the store * I was going to the store * I have gone to the store * I had gone to the store * I had been going to the store * I have been going to the store All of the phrases refer to actions in the past. The differences between the phrases indicate where it was a past event that was one-off, or continuous, or whether it started in the past and continued to the present, or started in the past and ended in the past. Language tenses exist for a reason. Simply denying them is delusional, IMHO.
panglott 12y ago
He's confusing the simple past verb form and the participle. In the English weak verbs, they look identical, but they are used in different tense/aspect/voice structures. Simple Past: He developed. He drank water. Participle: He has developed. He has drunk water. Claiming that it's ungrammatical in standard English to form a present/past perfect tense/aspect with a helper verb plus the participle...! It's nonsense of the highest order. This is epic-level peevery.