Subjectivity in usage

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:25 pm

Richard wrote:Just like tenses: pronouns are not Xui's strong suit.

Thank you for your opinion. Anybody else?

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:27 pm

I copy the question here for the new page.

Every discussion will come to a time of judgment. I really want to know about this:

Is there anyone else insisting that Present Perfect, working with Since, denotes a completion?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:50 am

Xui wrote:
Richard wrote:Just like tenses: pronouns are not Xui's strong suit.

Thank you for your opinion. Anybody else?

I'd second that.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:52 am

Xui wrote:I copy the question here for the new page.

Every discussion will come to a time of judgment. I really want to know about this:

Is there anyone else insisting that Present Perfect, working with Since, denotes a completion?

Who has said it does only denote a completion?

revel · Post by **revel** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:11 am

Hey all!

I've said it in the wrong thread.

Since as a time marker, for me, marks a past moment and implies that the action is still valid at the moment of speaking. I have never, until now, considered since as a marker of completed action. I have not been convinced by the arguements presented that since marks such completion. I may be wrong, but Xui seems to be alone in his disunderstanding of the implied meaning in "since".

peace,
revel.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:20 am

I thought everyone will support Metal's advanced idea that Since denotes a completion. This is truly alone.

My view of Since is same as those of many grammar sources I have quoted.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:22 am

revel wrote:...

Since as a time marker, for me, marks a past moment and implies that the action is still valid at the moment of speaking. I have never, until now, considered since as a marker of completed action.

peace,
revel.

The tendency is to give a universal reading (the U-perfect) to sentences containing "since" if the predicate does not modify it in any other way. The U-perfect implies that the event or state still holds at the utterance time. Nevertheless, experiential readings (the E-perfect) also occur, though less frequently. E-perfect readings infer that the event or state does not hold at the time of utterance.

U-perfect:

He has worked here since 1987 and now he's about to retire.

E-perfect: He has worked here since 1987; on four occasions in fact.

Saying that, the best way to disambiguate sentences that contain since is to modify the adverb itself:

He has worked here four times at least since 1987.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:43 am

Then U-perfect is compatible with the sources I quoted:

Ex: Unfinished actions or states: actions or states that began in the past and continue in the present.
e.g. I've been at this school since 1996.
http://www.learnenglish.org.uk/grammar/ ... ect02.html

Ex: 1. An action or situation that started in the past and continues in the present.
e.g. I have lived in Canada since 1984. (and I still do)
http://www.learn4good.com/languages/evr ... esentp.htm

Ex: A continuing action. The action started in the past and continues in the present. The structure is often combined with words which indicate an unfinished period, such as the last few weeks, for six months, since last year, etc
He has sold furniture for two years. (he still sells furniture)
http://www.hio.ft.hanze.nl/thar/grprp.htm

Ex: Grammar III
For and Since
For and Since are used with the present perfect to talk about something that began in the past and continues to the present.
We use For with the present perfect and lengths of time: ten days, two weeks, a year...
>>We have been in the Canary Islands for ten days.

We use Since with the present perfect and a specific time : January, Monday, 10:00...
>>We have been at this resort since Wednesday.
http://www.parlo.com/en/learn/courses/b ... ar3_en.asp

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 9:41 am

Xui wrote: Then U-perfect is compatible with the sources I quoted:

It is indeed, and since is compatible with both the U-perfect (now you have a new term, eh?) and the E-perfect.

Examples of adverb phrases where both the U and E readings are possible are:

since, for ---- days

Examples of adverb phrases where both the U reading is obligatory are:

at least since, ever since, for five days now, always

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 1:53 pm

Metal56 wrote: The sources you quote are mainly from pedagogical grammars.

According to your terms, are my sources still pedagogical or not?

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 5:02 pm

Because of the page http://www.gabrielatos.com/TTA.htm in your initiate message, you have judged that my common sources of Since as pedagogical grammars.

Metal56 wrote:The sources you quote are mainly from pedagogical grammars.
=======================

Now you found out a new pdf file, and noticed that my sources are compatible with the new terms:

Metal56 wrote:It is indeed, and since is compatible with both the U-perfect (now you have a new term, eh?) and the E-perfect.
========================

I don't know now if my sources are still regarded as pedagogical grammars or not?

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 6:52 am

Metal56 wrote:
Xui wrote:I guess in this forum, only I stubbornly disprove the Distance theory.
Did you disprove it?

If I didn't, you did.

Xui · Post by **Xui** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:30 am

At first we were talking about the page http://www.gabrielatos.com/TTA.htm, which is about Proximity and Distance: Tense expresses proximity (Present) or distance (Past), in relation not only to time, but also to possibility and status. Aspect indicates whether the user’s view of an event is external (Perfect), or internal (Progressive).

Because the page claims that Present Perfect only denotes a completion, I tried to disprove it by quoting some sources of Since and For as above, with Present Perfect, denoting an incompletion. However, you judged all my examples as pedagogical grammars.

And then you brought up a pdf file introducing U-perfect and E-perfect:
*U-perfect= the universal perfect
*E-perfect = existential (or experiential) perfect

Of course, I thought you used the new file to fortify Proximity and Distance, explaining how Since expresses a completion. Therefore I suggested to ask readers here if they believe Since only denotes a completion or not. Nobody seemed to agree with this.

Only at this time did you clarify you have changed the preference form Proximity/Distance to U-perfect/E-perfect: "Who has said it does only denote a completion?"
And the new concepts, U-perfect and E-perfect, as you explained, are compatible with my quoted common examples that are incompatible with the Distance theory. In other words, U-perfect and E-perfect have disproved the Distance theory by accepting my examples that you once denigrated as pedagogical.

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 11:15 am

Can't we simply ignore every post Xui makes? He doesn't understand
English that well, has no intention of ever doing so, and is completely batty.

I have long given up reading his posts, but still find it hard to follow a discussion based on his latest spoutings.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 1:46 pm

Xui wrote:I thought everyone will support Metal's advanced idea that Since denotes a completion. This is truly alone.

My view of Since is same as those of many grammar sources I have quoted.

What is it with you? Have you got a problem understanding? Can't you use modal auxiliaries?

<... Metal's advanced idea that Since denotes a completion.>

Metal's advanced idea that Since can denote a completion.

<This is truly alone.>

Read Comrie.

See:

http://www.sil.org/linguistics/Glossary ... tAspec.htm

I am not alone.

Teacher Discussion Forums

Subjectivity in usage

If to hoot....

Re: If to hoot....