Subjectivity in usage

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:18 am

Since-adverbials are ambiguous between being
durational and being inclusive. When since is durational, it yields the
U-perfect only. When since is inclusive, it yields the E-perfect (Vlach
1993; see also Bennett and Partee 1972, Dowty 1979). 1979). Alternatively (Arnim von Stechow, personal communication), since can be described as being neither durational nor inclusive, but the default perfect-level adverbial in the sense that it merely sets the LB of the perfect time span denoted by the perfect; therefore, all possible readings are permitted with since adverbials.

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~pancheva/IAI.pdf

*U-perfect= the universal perfect

*E perfect = existential (or experiential) perfect

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:24 am

metal56 wrote: They have worked here over the past three years. In fact they did so quite a number of times. (Possible completion of their working here. Who knows?)
======================

Can't you see that? Just because "Who knows", then the web page cannot finalize that Present Perfect indicates a completion!! Then it has overdone about Present Perfect, can't you see?

Just because you are not sure if "I have lived in HK since 1987" is a completion or not, so you cannot say it is a completion!! This is what all the grammar sources, those "pedagogical grammars", have implied.

You have disappointed Richard!

Xui

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:24 am

M56, tell me one of the places where you have lived since 1986.

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:26 am

And you answer

"I have lived in HK since 1986"

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:31 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:And you answer

"I have lived in HK since 1986"

So?

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:37 am

(Xui, stop deleting posts all over the place) M56's imaginary answer is yet another example of a situation where "I have lived in HK since 1986" doesn't mean "I live there now"

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:42 am

Xui wrote:
metal56 wrote: They have worked here over the past three years. In fact they did so quite a number of times. (Possible completion of their working here. Who knows?)
======================
Can't you see that? Just because "Who knows", then the web page cannot finalize that Present Perfect indicates a completion!! Then it has overdone about Present Perfect, can't you see?

Just because you are not sure if "I have lived in HK since 1987" is a completion or not, so you cannot say it is a completion!! This is what all the grammar sources, those "pedagogical grammars", have implied.

You have disappointed Richard!

Xui

Are you totally batty? READ MY POSTS:

Copy from an earlier post in this thread.:

<I have no argument against completion or incompletion both being possible, but it is the cotext, context (includes the speakers' pragmatic knowledge) and often the choice of verb which helps disambiguate the a present perfect sentence as:

Ex: I have lived in HK since 1987.

or

He has lived in HK for ten years.

He has been in Spain for two weeks.

All three are ambiguous out of context and outside discourse.

READ MY POSTand stop putting words in my mouth.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:44 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:M56, tell me one of the places where you have lived since 1986.

Since 96? Lithuania. Now I'm in Spain and I've lived here since 99.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:45 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:(Xui, stop deleting posts all over the place) M56's imaginary answer is yet another example of a situation where "I have lived in HK since 1986" doesn't mean "I live there now"

But the whole action, which includes "since 1986", is not finished. It is not a completion.

People have always confused tense with sentence. Can we really cut the verb out and just examine the verb -- in Present Perfect? No wonder they call tense as "The English Verb". The pdf file has just done that.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:48 am

This article is extremely pertinent to this discussion:

The adverbial ever since has only the U-perfect reading, most likely because of the universal association of ever, which indicates universal quantification over the points of the perfect time span.
The adverbial at least since also has only the U-perfect reading. Without
going into details, we will sketch what may be going on here. Addition of
at least to other adverbials also forces the durative reading. For example,
He was in his office between 3 and 4 permits both the durative and the inclusive interpretation of the adverbial. But He was in his office at least
between 3 and 4 has only the durative interpretation.25
We have said that since is both durative and inclusive.

--- cont at:

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~pancheva/IAI.pdf

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:53 am

Metal you have denied the same common opinion in most grammar sources, and depend on a pdf file for evidence. I must say I am impressed. Why? The initiate web page is not enough anymore?

What if I have done what you are doing now? English native speakers must say it is a joke. It is totally out of balance.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:06 am

Xui wrote:
But the whole action, which includes "since 1986", is not finished. It is not a completion.

[/size]

You keep using the word "completion". What exactly, for you, is complete or incomplete in present perfect sentences?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:10 am

Xui wrote:Metal you have denied the same common opinion in most grammar sources, and depend on a pdf file for evidence. I must say I am impressed. Why? The initiate web page is not enough anymore?

What if I have done what you are doing now? English native speakers must say it is a joke. It is totally out of balance.

<Metal you have denied the same common opinion in most grammar sources, >

You are lying, mate. Stop it! I started by telling you that with the sentences you offered, there was no reading that could guarantee completion or incompletion. That is what i said.

STOP LYING!

and depend on a pdf file for evidence.

You asked for supportive evidence, I gave it. Stop complaining and read it.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:37 am

Wrong Post.

Richard · Post by **Richard** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:45 am

About 17 hours ago Xui wrote:I have nothing to say anymore.

Oh, but he has had plenty more to say. He goes on and on and on and on and on... just like the Energizer bunny.

Here's my take on Xui:

He's a frustrated English learner.

He's a frustrated English teacher.

He wants so much to be able to understand English like a native speaker yet knows he never will.

So he purchases dozens (perhaps hundreds?) of English grammar books yet is impatient and insulted when they seem to contradict each other.

And thus he goes on an endless crusade to formulate his own grammar that will satisfy only him.

But in the process, he is constantly frustrated when native speakers provide counterexamples. He can't stand this, because it demolishes his belief that a grammar can simplistically explain (and predict) any utterance.

**********
What do you guys think? Close? You've 'known' him much longer than I have. What's your take?