tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post115590846274316858..comments2024-03-16T00:21:43.240+00:00Comments on Separated by a Common Language: the present perfectlynneguisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-83545330615371444402022-04-24T12:16:35.140+01:002022-04-24T12:16:35.140+01:00Long, long ago...
using the preterite in Danish/G...Long, long ago...<br /><br /><i>using the preterite in Danish/German in these cases would result in sentences that meant »Were you eating?«, rather than »Did you eat?«.</i><br /><br />Not in German, which doesn't distinguish any such things. The difference between the simple and the composite past* is purely stylistic, plus the fact that the simple one is absent in the southern third of the German-speaking area (entirely in the southwest, entirely except for two verbs in the southeast). The situation is much more similar to the French one, except for the absence of anything remotely similar to the French <i>imparfait</i>.<br /><br />* Called exclusively by silly names: the simple one is variously <i>Präteritum</i> (but the other one is a past, too), <i>Imperfekt</i> (not even close) or <i>Mitvergangenheit</i> (as if "with-past" even meant anything), the other is <i>Perfekt</i> (nope) or <i>Vergangenheit</i> (but the other one is a past, too).David Marjanovićnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-53560219396943522652017-05-25T23:13:58.330+01:002017-05-25T23:13:58.330+01:00You can certainly say "Have you eaten?",...You can certainly say "Have you eaten?", most likely "Have you eaten yet?" in American English. "Did you eat?", however is more forceful. Big Edhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15157216373598387668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-54701953252433983482017-01-30T21:20:17.099+00:002017-01-30T21:20:17.099+00:00In Spain there is a big difference between "H...In Spain there is a big difference between "Have you eaten lobster?" and "Did you eat lobster?" (of course in Spanish!). So, I don't know where "that region" is in Spain where they don't use the present perfect. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-72969393272594423912016-12-09T18:11:44.850+00:002016-12-09T18:11:44.850+00:00One common significance of the Present Perfect is...One common significance of the Present Perfect is to refer to a <b>resulting state</b> in the present of some action in the past.<br /><br />In BrE — and as mollymooly observes in Irish English — there's a strong preference for this usage when <b>resulting state</b> is a possible reading of the situation.<br /><br />Thus, in my later years I’m able to say <i>Did you have breakfast?</i>, a usage that was alien to me in my youth. I’m not enquiring whether the addressee is hungry, and there’s nothing I can do about it anyway. By contrast, an irish host saying <i>Have you eaten?</i> is enquiring about the guest’s comfort/lack of hunger — which would be the <b>resulting state</b> from having eaten, and which could clearly be remedied by the speaker.<br /><br />The Present Perfect of <i>forget</i> often focuses on a <b>resulting state</b> — but not always. If my addressee is reluctant to go out into the rain, I might ask <i>Have you forgotten your umbrella?</i>. But if he or she arrives looking soaked, it’s different. Yes, the soaking is a <b>resulting state</b> but it isn’t a specifically <b><i>present</i></b> state.<br /><br />I agree with mollymooly that in BrE/IrE the appropriate question is <i>Have you forgotten your password?</i> because the inability to proceed is a <b>resulting state</b> in the present, the immediate here-and-now.<br /><br />If something <b><i>can</i></b> be read as a resulting state, then in BrE/IrE it <i><b>is</b></i> read as a resulting state.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-86417464919906259922016-12-09T15:51:10.269+00:002016-12-09T15:51:10.269+00:00"Did you forget your password" almost de..."Did you forget your password" almost demands a response along the lines of "When are you thinking of? Because I did forget it a few months ago, so I changed it. I remember the new one, by the way". On the other hand, on seeing someone arrive with wet hair, "Did you forget your umbrella?" seems far more natural than "Have you forgotten your umbrella?". From my layman's perspective I hazard that in both instances the tense is past perfect, not present perfect ("Yes, I did forget my password / umbrella", not "Yes, I have forgotten my whatever").KeithDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10451059429340892054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-71467735525265608492016-11-14T20:00:28.264+00:002016-11-14T20:00:28.264+00:00I can imagine a context in which I could say
Hav...I can imagine a context in which I could say <br /><br /><i>Have you ever gone to France just to buy wine?</i><br /><br />as more appropriate than<br /><br /><i>Have you ever been to France just to buy wine?</i><br /><br />The latter is not impossible, but the former highlights the actual excursion.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-82319906432057905912016-11-14T19:54:35.009+00:002016-11-14T19:54:35.009+00:00In Honey I shrunk the kids, it's impossible fo...In <i>Honey I shrunk the kids</i>, it's impossible for <i>shrunk</i> to be anything other that a Past Simple — or, as you put it, Preterite. <br /><br /><i>*I taken a holiday</i> and <i>*The lake frozen</i> are impossible sentences — at least in any dialect that I know of. <i>Taken</i> and <i>frozen</i> can <b>only</b> be Past Particles.<br /><br />Now <i>shrunk</i> and <i>swum</i> are simply not like that in various dialects — and not only American ones.<br /><br />Even in your (Standard English) dialect there are many words which serve as <b> both </b> Past Simple<b> and </b> Past Participle: <i>had, made, got, sent, brought, caught, left</i> and many more.<br /><br />And that's just the <b>irregular</b> (strong) verbs. <b>All</b> the <b>regular</b> (weak) verbs share one form — ending in <i>-ed</i> for Past Simple and Past Participle.<br /><br />And oh yes, the dialect that you and I share <b>merges functions</b> in a way that American English doesn't. You and I have only <i>got</i> while Americans tend to use <i>gotten</i> for the Past Participle.<br /><br />Language — and the grammar of language — is what we observe to be known and used. What people use is not misuse. What people know is not ignorance.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-84924513473809899552016-11-13T23:40:55.123+00:002016-11-13T23:40:55.123+00:00I think there's a much starker difference betw...I think there's a much starker difference between AmE and BritE in the AmE misuse or ignorance of the actual preterite. AmE often or routinely (survey required) use the past participle instead of the preterite. Early example — 'Honey, I shrunk the kids' instead of 'Honey, I shrank the kids.'Or 'I swum' instead of 'I swam.'Patchwordhttp://www.netmedianz.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-54586425296406923192015-04-15T21:25:09.761+01:002015-04-15T21:25:09.761+01:00In 1911, "Did you eat yet" was already i...In 1911, "Did you eat yet" was already in use:<br />Abe and Mawruss: Being Further Adventures of Potash and ... - Page 84<br />https://books.google.com/books?id=RhctAAAAYAAJ<br />Montague Glass - 1911 - Read - More editions<br />Uncle Mosha replied, somewhat testily. "Sure, sure," Aaron Kronberg hastened to say. "Did you eat yet?" "I never eat in the middle of the day," Uncle Mosha said. "I am up here on business."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-29047210437318485052014-05-18T21:08:49.210+01:002014-05-18T21:08:49.210+01:00Have you eaten breakfast vs. did you eat breakfast...Have you eaten breakfast vs. did you eat breakfast: The former suggests to me that the option to eat breakfast is still available. Presumably in AmE this is indicated via the addition of yet.<br /><br />Did you forget your password: What really annoys me is Windows XP's Add/Remove programs dialog{ue?} which says "Please wait while the list is being populated". Not only does the word "being" sound superfluous to me here, but in fact the list is clearly not <i>being</i> populated, which is why the message exhorts me to wait for it to be populated in the first place. (By comparison, Windows 7 does populate its equivalent window incrementally.)Neil Rashbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14217111205775776357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-9528307388379981742014-03-19T16:43:13.125+00:002014-03-19T16:43:13.125+00:00"He has tragically lost his footing and has f..."He has tragically lost his footing and has fallen" I have heard described in the UK as being in the 'footballer's tense', because most of us first came across it being used by soccer players when interviewed on TV.<br />It seems to be a working class thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-36362357833065267562012-12-30T04:35:21.910+00:002012-12-30T04:35:21.910+00:00'Have you ever gone to France?' is a bit o...'Have you ever gone to France?' is a bit odd for the reasons you imply. You'd only ask it if you weren't in France, and in that case you'd probably use 'been to'. lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-53871325214500012972012-12-29T23:34:43.944+00:002012-12-29T23:34:43.944+00:00Do the phrases "Have you ever gone to France&...Do the phrases "Have you ever gone to France" and "Have you ever been to France" mean the same to the American perspective and, if they do, which one is more commonly used in AE?<br />In the same way, would "He has gone to France" mean exactly the same as "He left for France", and hence is still in France right now; whereas "He has been to France" implies that he's already back from his trip.<br />what if you say "Paul went to France"? Does the meaning sound kind of more ambiguous, and then will basically depend on the context implied, as long as one can either understand that Paul is already back from France or that he's still there? What do you think?Elianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16930398121025074531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-50401314511450316062011-05-22T00:40:49.024+01:002011-05-22T00:40:49.024+01:00Reading this a little after the fact, unfortunatel...Reading this a little after the fact, unfortunately, but just wanted to point out that Australian English seems to have gone the other way: the present perfect is taking over functions which uncontrovertibly call for the preterite in BrE. For example, a police commissioner speaking about a death from the recent 'planking' craze: <br /><br />"He has tragically lost his footing and fallen to the ground below"<br /><br />(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387272/Planking-claims-victim-Acton-Beale-falls-balcony-death.html)<br /><br />One of my lecturers has a theory that this is a shift from preterite-always to present-perfect-always, with the US being more conservative (as is often the case) and Australia being most advanced, with the UK somewhere in between ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-36711830145575880152010-11-02T09:54:31.114+00:002010-11-02T09:54:31.114+00:00Indeed I would, biochemist. I suspect that I would...Indeed I would, biochemist. I suspect that I would have done well into middle age.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-40903978438457105132010-11-01T12:22:34.203+00:002010-11-01T12:22:34.203+00:00David Crosbie - when you were younger you might ha...David Crosbie - when you were younger you might have said 'I've just done that [for you]'?biochemistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-9956156296724279982010-10-26T00:03:13.564+01:002010-10-26T00:03:13.564+01:00This morning my wife asked me to open an email and...This morning my wife asked me to open an email and leave it on screen for her. I replied<br /><i>I just did</i> — something I would never have said when I was younger.<br /><br />I don't find it useful to say that my grammar has changed. I've simply adopted a different stock linguistic response to a stock situation. In my (British) grammar <i>I just did</i> was always a possibility — but one that in the past I didn't choose.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-21400851109328295112010-10-15T23:40:15.146+01:002010-10-15T23:40:15.146+01:00djweaverbeaver
There's no way this could have...djweaverbeaver<br /><br /><i>There's no way this could have a relation to the present</i><br /><br />On the contrary, his finger is still broken. A year later with the fracture healed, he'll be obliged to say <i>I broke my finger back then</i>.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-12150964959331051872010-10-13T02:35:33.276+01:002010-10-13T02:35:33.276+01:00Hello,
Proud AmE speaker here and I love to engag...Hello,<br /><br />Proud AmE speaker here and I love to engage in "heated conversations" (ie. arguments) over differences in English usage.<br /><br />This discussion reminded me of an incident between to Englishmen to which I was a witness. I hear a piercing scream from one of the guys, to which other other guy says: "What's happened?" The guy then responds: "I've broken my finger!" (Expletives omitted) I was more concerned about those sentences than about actually trying to find him some help. <br /><br />To my American ears, I would never have used the present perfect in either of those sentences(Side note: "I would have never used..." also sounds perfectly fine where I live in the American South. I'm recalling a previous discussion in which many indicated that they found this construction grammatically incorrect.) I'd think that we are all aware of the fact that something that clearly happened in the past, even if it was literally two seconds earlier, and now it's over. I see the act of breaking one's finger as a one-time (almost instantaneous occurrence). There's no way this could have a relation to the present, except perhaps the resulting pain. Someone asking "what's happened" would lead me to think that they would a whole list/rundown of every thing that's happened from a given point in the past until now, hence my use of the present perfect here with the verb "to happen".<br /><br />One particular hypothesis of mine is that the U.S. is a much younger country than Great Britain. Since most of the things we've built and created are recent, we have no problem completely destroying something and replacing it something completely new and different. We have very short attention spans and the collective memory of a goldfish and don't hold on to the past in the same as they might back across the Pond. I admit that this is a rather specious argument since this very reasoning could be applied to Australia, for instance, but then again, we cut our ties to the crown a very "long" time ago in comparison. Just something to think about.<br /><br />Finally, this same issue exists in Spanish. In the U.S., we tend to teach Latin American Spanish, and Latin American speakers definitely use the equivalent of the present perfect ('pretérito perfecto' or the preterit perfect) a lot less. When it is used, it is used in a very similar way to the AmE usage. I began learning Spanish during my time in Germany from Spaniards, so I learned the Spain Spanish rules in which certain words automatically trigger the present perfect such as when say this morning, today (literally 'this day' in Spanish), this week, this month, this year. When I returned to the U.S. and, mind you, the teacher was from Chile, she kept trying to tell me how wrong I was whenever I applied this rule and she was completely unaware of the Spanish usage. Not to mention, many U.S. textbooks incorrectly refer to it as the 'presente perfecto', a direct translation of English, but no such "tense" exists in any serious Spanish grammar.djweaverbeavernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-4531985126101827972010-10-10T18:31:12.608+01:002010-10-10T18:31:12.608+01:00biochemist
I have a feeling that just is an area ...biochemist<br /><br />I have a feeling that <i><b>just</b></i> is an area where more and more British speakers are drifting towards American usage.<br /><br />Perhaps it's because we see so many ads (commercials) claiming that <br /><br /><i>X just got better</i>.<br /><br />It doesn't actually bother me, for reasons that I tried to explain earlier ...<br /><br />I simply don't accept that the choice of adverbial determines the use of Present Perfect or Past Simple — not in British use and not in American. I'm convinced that speakers (less often writers) make a <b>pragmatic</b> decision to see events as <br /><br />— in the <b>relevant past</b> <br />often but not always the recent past<br />what I call the <b>time period</b> UP TO NOW<br /><br />For example I say <i>I've just seen him</i> if I'm making a comment on something currently salient in the conversation<br /><br />— at a definite point in the past<br />often but not always stipulated by a time adverbial<br />what I call the <b>time period</b> BEFORE NOW<br /><br />For example I quite often say <i>I just saw him</i> when I feel as if I'm offering collateral information rather than commenting on something said<br /><br />The word <i>just</i> changes meaning between ' in the recent past' and 'at a recent specific time'.<br /><br />The difference is very slight. It depends on how you look at it — which is why grammarians use the term <b>aspect</b>. My time of seeing him is a point in the past which can be viewed either as indeterminate or as so clear to the speaker that he or she represents it as definite.<br /><br />My contention is that this amounts to viewing the event is one or other of two <b>time periods</b> which in the real world overlap — except that the BEFORE NOW period excludes the present, whereas the UP TO NOW period includes it.<br /><br />If you haven't done so, do please have a look at my <a href="http://web.me.com/davidcrosbie/Site/Blog/Entries/2010/9/12_Time_Reference.html" rel="nofollow">table</a>.<br /><br />Picture <i><b>seeing him</b></i> as a momentary event symbolised by a cross. The difference between <i>I've just seen him</i> and <i>I just saw him</i> is the difference between placing the cross in the UP TO NOW box and putting in the BEFORE NOW box.David Crosbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01858358459416955921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-86119461521147425202010-10-09T22:35:46.341+01:002010-10-09T22:35:46.341+01:00Yes, I have written about 'got(ten)' back ...Yes, I have written about 'got(ten)' <a href="http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.com/2006/06/irregular-verbs-gotten-fit-knit.html" rel="nofollow">back here</a>. Otherwise, I'm letting you carry on this conversation on your own!lynneguisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10171345732985610861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-56913681691024526852010-10-09T22:28:54.140+01:002010-10-09T22:28:54.140+01:00Yes, I know. I'm sure Lynne has written about ...Yes, I know. I'm sure Lynne has written about it already. I think most Americans distinguish between "got" and "gotten." For me, "I've got"="I have." "I've gotten"="I have acquired."<br /><br />And the distinction you're making can't be made in my dialect. I don't use the present perfect in that way.Juliehttp://www.julieannmaahs.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-38349892614318741322010-10-09T21:28:37.861+01:002010-10-09T21:28:37.861+01:00Julie, a Brit would regard 'gotten' as a d...Julie, a Brit would regard 'gotten' as a dialect usage...<br /><br />But as for 'just', how about 'it just exploded' or 'it just fell out of my hands' [just = simply or spontaneously], compared with 'it's just arrived' or 'it has just finished'[just = recently]. I think the first example of 'it just got better' uses 'just' in the latter sense with the former construction.biochemistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-84809313678681944952010-10-09T05:54:49.476+01:002010-10-09T05:54:49.476+01:00biochemist: Okay, yes, that meaning is possible, b...biochemist: Okay, yes, that meaning is possible, but I would not expect it without some contextual clues, as: "It just got faster, not better." I use the present perfect for indefinite times within a bracket, not for specific events with stated times. "It's gotten better (since the last time)." "It's just gotten better" feels like a temporal dissonance.Juliehttp://www.julieannmaahs.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28787909.post-49316324382538855772010-10-08T17:33:10.275+01:002010-10-08T17:33:10.275+01:00In the recent past - Julie, a Brit would say '...In the recent past - Julie, a Brit would say 'it has just got better'.<br /><br />We (BrE) might say 'it just got better' with some surprise, if 'it' was transformed for no apparent reason, and 'just' here is not indicating recent past, but a sort of spontaneous effect.<br /><br />Or, 'it has got better' if a system has become easier to use or more efficient as the technology has improved....biochemistnoreply@blogger.com