Globish

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:39 am

But you can say it in the present tense too. I have come across sentences like, "He is/He's twice married" " She is/She's twice divorced."
You can say: Elizabeth Taylor is/Elizabeth Taylor's eight times married .

You can also do that in BrEng. It's the same structure as "He is very happy".

I saw the movie four times.

Would you say that if a friend asked you to go and see the film with him?

He wrote a lot of books till now.

So, in AE, the adverbial "till now" and the past simple connect the past with the moment of speaking - as would the present perfect, with or without the adverbial, in BrEng - , right?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:40 am

The very availability of the choice attests the redundance.

Of either.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:42 am

With this discussion in mind, can anyone tell me how AE speakers define the difference between an aspect and a tense?

Also, would one use this in AE?

A: Hey, David fell in love.

B: At last! That's why he's been acting weird.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:49 am

At least, there are many languages that do not have the present perfect.

How does your language express the same or similar?

A lifetime isn't enough to read everything.

Indeed.

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:51 am

How does your language express the same or similar?

My language doesnt have the present perfect.

Quote:
The very availability of the choice attests the redundance.

Of either.

Nope. The simple past is not redundant. The sentences expressed
in the present perfect can be described in the simple past,
but not the other way around. The simple past
is the larger set, with a redundant subset.

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:53 am

So, in AE, the adverbial "till now" and the past simple connect the past with the moment of speaking - as would the present perfect, with or without the adverbial, in BrEng - , right?

The till now is optional there.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:59 am

Quote:
How does your language express the same or similar?
My language doesnt have the present perfect.

Yes, I assumed so, but how does it allow you to express similar ideas to those expressed by the present perfect in BE?

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:03 am

Quote:
I saw the movie four times.

Would you say that if a friend asked you to go and see the film with him?

Why not?
Optionally I can add "already".
Adding these cute little adverbials would precisely do the job of the present perfect (in case you are very particular about nuances.)

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:05 am

Yes, I assumed so, but how does it allow you to express similar ideas to those expressed by the present perfect in BE?

In my language, we are doing very well with just the simple past.
We may add those adverbials, if we want to. (just, already etc)

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:05 am

The sentences expressed
in the present perfect can be described in the simple past,
but not the other way around.

Doesn't the AE use of the past simple in place of the present perfect require adverb support, whether implicitly or explicitly expressed? And are you saying that the present perfect in redundant in every case in AE?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:07 am

In my language, we are doing very well with just the simple past.

That sounds like Indian English. Is it?

We may add those adverbials, if we want to. (just, already etc)

OK, thanks.

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:10 am

Doesn't AE use of the past simple in place of the present perfect require adverb support, whether implicitly or explicitly expressed?

That is precisely what I am trying to say.
(Optional) adverb support is enough.
You don't need an entire tense just to show a trivial nuance,
specially when you can manage without it.
It pays to economize on the rules.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:29 am

Adding these cute little adverbials would precisely do the job of the present perfect (in case you are very particular about nuances.)

Which means that even AE speakers know that the past simple itself cannot express a connection with the present. It remains a PAST tense, even in AE.

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:05 am

(Optional) adverb support is enough.
You don't need an entire tense just to show a trivial nuance,

But if we are talking about efficiency and disambiguity, the present perfect comes out tops, right?

Also would you say that the nuance that can be expressed between the forms below is always trivial?

I'm living in Oxford.
I live in Oxford.

Anuradha Chepur · Post by **Anuradha Chepur** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:23 am

Which means that even AE speakers know that the past simple itself cannot express a connection with the present. It remains a PAST tense, even in AE.

The point here is not whether the past simple can express by itself a connection with the present.
The point is whether we can express the connection of the past with the present (if we insist on it) without using the present perfect.
The point is whether we can eliminate the present perfect.