I suppose I asked for my rebuke from Metal, after all, ask 100 teachers about tense and you'll get 100 answers, including some poor souls who think that the time chart can explain every last thing, even when a 2 second reflection that the same event can be expressed in different ways would disabuse them. I really meant that those of us who have read all the recent posts probably didn't learn a lot from the article.
"People like me" don't get it, but the students do, naturally.
One reason though, why a time chart can not very well explain "aspect", is that it is a daft term. Progressive forms essentially indicate a temporary stretch of time. "Present Perfect" forms essentially indicate some kind of contemporary achievement of experience, "have" is a possessive word. What business have these two things got running around as a couple and calling themselves "aspect"?
Subjectivity in usage
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Most important, the agreement that Present Perfect, when working with Since, denotes an incompletion, is specially noted and recorded by many conventional grammar books:
Ex: I have lived in HK since 1987.
Can Aspect Theory ignore this common fact? If those theorists don't want to spread falsity, they have to in their theory openly explain that "I have lived in HK since 1987" is a completion, because of Present Perfect. Will they do that? Can they do that?
What is the point in not mentioning it at all? When people like me have pointed out that Present Perfect CAN also denote incompletion, then they jump up with a refuting example:
Ex: I have lived in HK since 1987.
Can Aspect Theory ignore this common fact? If those theorists don't want to spread falsity, they have to in their theory openly explain that "I have lived in HK since 1987" is a completion, because of Present Perfect. Will they do that? Can they do that?
What is the point in not mentioning it at all? When people like me have pointed out that Present Perfect CAN also denote incompletion, then they jump up with a refuting example:
Can you see the ridicule here?Met56 wrote:
A: John's just been fired!
B: What! What a shame, he's worked here since 1989.
Can you see completion there?
Xui wrote:
Can you see the ridicule here?[/quote
You seem very antagonistic in your posts.
Please tell me how this sentence, out of context, guarantees that the speaker is expressing incompletion.
Ex: I have lived in HK since 1987.
As a receiver/reader of that sentence, you can infer all you want, but you cannot guarantee that the speaker is still living there at the moment of speaking.
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.
Very much so. However, I am so only to the subject matters, never to any person. I have pointed out the ridicule of the web page, not to anyone. I will sincerely apologize if anyone finds my words are pointing to him. Tell me and I will do it.metal56 wrote:You seem very antagonistic in your posts.Xui wrote: Can you see the ridicule here?
================
I will answer the rest tomorrow.
Last edited by Xui on Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
<... ask 100 teachers about tense and you'll get 100 answers, >
And ask me about the English present perfect and I may even say that it is a discourse marker and not a tense or an aspect.
< "have" is a possessive word.>
That's how it started out, yes.
And ask me about the English present perfect and I may even say that it is a discourse marker and not a tense or an aspect.
< "have" is a possessive word.>
That's how it started out, yes.
Last edited by metal56 on Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
My study and research has first accepted the agreements in the conventional grammar. I will only study more based on them. For example, I had long argued with English native speakers that the Past Family (like in the past xx years) should take Simple Past, because grammars didn't mention about them and I was taught that Present Perfect doesn't stay with past time adverbials. Later, I accepted what they had told me, the Past Family are used with Present Perfect, standing for something not finished.metal56 wrote: Please tell me how this sentence, out of context, guarantees that the speaker is expressing incompletion.
Ex: I have lived in HK since 1987.
Now again, as far as I know, according to all or most grammar sources, Since refers to an action now not finished, as I can search instantly a lot of sources:
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
However, your Present-Perfect example is different. It is said after knowing it is a finish (from the first Present Perfect):
It is a rare example for explaining Present Perfect. Or you may please search something supporting you. I don't think there is any.Without context and cotext, I cannot know if they still work there at the moment of speaking. For example, it could be this context:
A: John's just been fired!
B: What! What a shame, he's worked here since 1989.
Can you see completion there?
=====================
I am afraid that my answer here will be the same as above. People have already an agreement as to whether examples like yours stand for finish or unfinish.metal56 wrote:
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.
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
I suggest you search and quote something supporting you. I don't think there is any. If you can quote two web pages (Since and For denoting completion) supporting you, I admit I am very surprised.
And there is now one more thing: The Past Family (like in the past xx years). I have been persuaded and accepted that these time adverbials work with Present Perfect and denote something not finished. That is the problem. Even now if you have succeeded in proving that Since is only a completion, how about its cousins that have been hidden away for a long time? As the Past Family also prefers Present Perfect to denote an unfinish, are you going to prove also that these time adverbials denote a completion? But this opinion was the one I held and finally had to discard:
Ex: They have worked here in the past three years. (= a finish?)
== Now I have to accept, even with Present Perfect, it is an incompletion.
Xui
I agree, that is implied, but still I get no guarantee that the action/state/process is not completed at the time of speaking. That clarity will only come through placing the sentence in a discourse.
As you use Since, you have to accept the incompletion implied by the combination of Present Perfect and Since.
IXui [/size]
Xui[/size][/quote]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)[/quote]
How about with the experiential present perfect:
A: What things has he done in his working life?
B: He has sold furniture, worked as a waiter, been a gigolo, and been a volunteer for a major charity.
There, each action is one of completion at the time of speaking. It is possible that his working life is not completed, but can you guarantee the truth of that just from A’s question?
He has sold furniture for two years. (he still sells furniture)[/quote]
How about with the experiential present perfect:
A: What things has he done in his working life?
B: He has sold furniture, worked as a waiter, been a gigolo, and been a volunteer for a major charity.
There, each action is one of completion at the time of speaking. It is possible that his working life is not completed, but can you guarantee the truth of that just from A’s question?
Xui wrote:
Without context and cotext, I cannot know if they still work there at the moment of speaking. For example, it could be this context:
A: John's just been fired!
B: What! What a shame, he's worked here since 1989.
Can you see completion there?
It is a rare example for explaining Present Perfect. Or you may please search something supporting you. I don't think there is any.
Before I do search for, or provide, support, I would like you to say whether you think that mini-dialogue is grammatically correct.
Please do not misrepresent me because you need to get your specific agenda across. I did not say that since is only a conclusion. I did say that there is a natural tendency to infer from since that the action still continues. but I also said that out of context there are often ambiguities and no guarantees.Xui wrote:
Even now if you have succeeded in proving that Since is only a completion, how about its cousins that have been hidden away for a long time?
Xui[/size]
Also please remember this thread is about subjectivity in laguage use.
Last edited by metal56 on Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Take a look at Comrie and his thoughts on the experiential present perfect.Xui[/size]
Ex: They have worked here in the past three years. (= a finish?)
== Now I have to accept, even with Present Perfect, it is an incompletion.
Experiential perfect: where a situation has occurred at least once during some time in the past leading up to the present