The Hidden Evidence: The Past Family

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jwschang

Guest
Casiopea said:
Casiopea wrote:

Cas3. I ate. (finished, over, ended)
Cas4. I have eaten. (finished, over, ended)

'ate' is an action that HAPPENED in the past :oops: "action" has got to go.

jws replied:
I don't understand what you mean by "action" has got to go

We need to delete or change the word "action" in part A of our definition. Otherwise, it defines the Perfect and the Simple Past as having no difference: [Sometimes there's a difference (as in the "enjoyed talking" example), sometimes maybe no (as in the "ate" example).]

Definition Part A. Present Perfect expresses an action that is already COMPLETED at the present time.

jws added:
No difference. That's what I meant by saying that the difference may not ALWAYS be there between the two tenses. Which is very true, because we often have a choice of saying the same thing in more than one way.

Well, not necessarily. Just because a given speaker, native or non-native, feels there is no difference between, say, "I ate" and "I have eaten" doesn't prove they are the same. That is, the similarity is apparent only. Both actions ended, finished, are over. They seem similar, don't they, but they aren't. (Agreed. I may see no difference, someone else may see or mean a difference.)

1. I think most (all??, including scientific ones?) definitions will have limitations. If we apply the Pareto Principle, it may be good enough that the definition covers the main gist; I think it cannot be completely comprehensive. Exceptions, specific contexts, etc will have to be dealt with by qualification, illustrations, etc.
2. Trouble is, many students like "clear" rules, so the teacher is hard-pressed on this, to avoid confusing the student.
3. I try to keep it simple (where possible) and "stupid". If the learner can first learn to use the language WITH mistakes but generally correctly, then the refinement comes later and gradually. Some educators may disagree with this viewpoint, like saying old habits die hard.
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
Casiopea explained:
EX: "I have seen him (inging) in the past week"

Even though the participle ('-ing') is not there on the surface for the naked eye to see, it's there underlyingly as part 'n parcel of the verb's meaning.

Shun replied:
If we [can't] depend on what we can['t] see, how can I know if there are how many words there underlying:

Cas Ex: I've seen you (doing something) under the bridge at night

(I am joking, as I see nothing at nights, especially under the bridge). :wink:

Ok. That's pretty funny :D , I gotta admit. Joking aside for the moment, though, you've asked a very good question: How do we know what's been omitted? I agree. It's difficult to learn how to use a language when speakers consistently leave out words, the meaning of which they know intuitively and hence the reason for leaving them out. (English, by the way, is not the only culprit there, lemme tell ya :( ). For speakers who lack that intuitive knowledge, or native like knowledge, there are ways to gaining it. One of which is studying a language's grammar: Knowing things like the structure of verbs for example, tells us a lot about what's underlying, what can be omitted, and why speaker's omit words.

Take the fact that 'have seen' takes a gerund or an infinitive as its object, and, moreover, that the meaning of that object is inherent within the verb (part n' parcel) and so it can be omitted from the sentence without changing the meaning of 'have seen'.

Knowing the function and distribution of any given part word or phrase, provides us with a better understanding as to why a sentence like "I have seen him in the past" appears to negate the rules. It doesn't negate the rule; it nicely supports it. Present participles and "for the past week" both express continuity and so the reason why they are compatible. The main verb 'have seen' is not compatible with "for the past week", which is where you and I agree. So you have proven Grammarians right :D : 'past time adverbials' are not compatible with Present Perfect verb forms, which you've kindly proven, once more, with your last examples:

Shun added:
Ex: I have seen him yesterday.
Ex: I have seen him (jogging) yesterday.

Both of the sentences above are ungrammatical. The 'past time adverbial' "yesterday" is not compatible with Present Perfect verb forms, just as da' Man said, nor is it compatible with Present Participles, 'ing'. One expresses continuity, whereas the other does not.

Cas :D
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
Jws's 8th point to Shun:
8. One last word to you, Shun. You used words like "twist" to describe my replies (which I gave as a friend on the forum). I shall not ask you for an apology, but warn you that you are not only NOT contributing to this FRIENDLY forum by your use of words and lack of respect for others and for yourself, but verging very close to breaking its rules and etiquette (please read the rules if you wish to continue). Think about my advice and you'll be a better person. :wink:

I don't know what to say first: "Ohmygawd, I'm having a flashback :puppydog: , get me my pills :drinking: ", or "Pass the popcorn :popcorn: , would'ja?, 'cause I've seen this part before and happily-ever-after Disney style ain't where it's headed.

Cas :roll:
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
You are just too cute for words, jws.

Whisper: Between me, you, and the fence post, them there words below are not mine. :D

jwschang said:
Casiopea said:
I think it's not unconventional, only thing being that grammarians (that's just speaking broadly and jokingly) fear treading on unfamiliar territory that is the domain of mathematicians (or graphic artists!!), such as graphical representation of an idea.

Cas :D
 

shun

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Cas,

Present participles and "for the past week" both express continuity and so the reason why they are compatible. The main verb 'have seen' is not compatible with "for the past week", which is where you and I agree. :shock:

I doubt that. "For the past week" is a member of the Past Family, which are compatible with Present Perfect:
Ex: They have stayed in this hotel for the past week.
== The structure is perfectly alright. :eek:

This is the reason I asked about the Past Family. I am afraid I can't agree "The main verb 'have seen' is not compatible with "for the past week." :? :?
 

shun

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Cas wrote:
EX: "I have seen him (inging) in the past week"
Even though the participle ('-ing') is not there on the surface for the naked eye to see, it's there underlyingly as part 'n parcel of the verb's meaning.

My reply: I still don't like the solution. Compare:
Ex1: "I have seen him in the past week"
Ex2: "I have seen him (jogging) in the past week."
As we see, in Ex1, "in the past week" modifies the subject I.
In Ex2, it modifies the object HIM.

Most of all, I cannot pretend the time phrase modifies something I cannot see.
:cry: :cry:
 

shane

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Member Type
Student or Learner
jwschang said:
Sure. That's just to have the Past Perfect sit alongside the Present Perfect in the bus, which is taking all of us on a wonderful holiday to Dalian, where Shane is.

Wow! The man studied Chinese for six years before going off to China! I hope I have the chance to meet him.

Just a side issue: Dalian is one of the cleanest and most beautiful of Chinese cities, I'm told. It's in the northeast, on the southern coast of Liaoning province in the old Manchuria. I have yet to visit the place (supposed to have gone early this month). I just think that TDOL (whose students include Chinese), Ronbee, Red5, yourself....... should one day visit China. :)

Er...I've just popped my head round the door to see what's going on. Don't mind me! This conversation is far too complicated for me to comprehend! :shock:

Anyways, if any of you plan to come to Dalian, let me know, and I'll be waiting with a cold beer. :D

</closes door quietly on the way out>
 

shane

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Member Type
Student or Learner
Casiopea said:
Dalian sounds wonderfully peaceful, not to mention eye staging gorgeous. I'm considering a trip soon. Japan ain't that far away from China. :D I had Chinese speaking students in Canada. They taught me a few words--I just can't seem to get around the dialects, though. When I greet someone in Mandarin, for example, they reply in Cantonese :roll: Ni haw ma? Shei shei lee How'dya like my Chinese :shock:

Cas :D

Hey, nice Chinese Cas! I have a friend over there in Japan, he moved there with his Japanese bride last month. He's also studying Japanese. Studying Asian languages is very hard, isn't it? Nowadays I don't write much, I prefer to type Chinese characters instead. I know - I'm lazy. :p

Feel free to come to Dalian and have a look around; you won't regret it! Oh, and you might want to have a look at my website. I updated it, and there are lots of newer pictures on there now! :D
 
J

jwschang

Guest
Casiopea said:
You are just too cute for words, jws.
Whisper: Between me, you, and the fence post, them there words below are not mine. :D
Cas :D

Through my fault, through my most grevious fault.

I just saw Shane's post. As he says, you won't regret visiting Dalian. From the photos on his site, he must be having a satisfying time there. Perhaps, after you've finished with what you're doing in Japan, you might want to teach in China. The people are generally friendly and courteous to foreigners. Even if you don't speak Chinese, you'll probably get lots of help. I guess it's the same in Japan.

Are we turning this into a chat room, on non-English issues!! :wink:
 
J

jwschang

Guest
shane said:
Feel free to come to Dalian and have a look around; you won't regret it! Oh, and you might want to have a look at my website. I updated it, and there are lots of newer pictures on there now! :D

Hi Shane. Read about you in the members' intro and just saw the photos on your site. They look great! I may be visiting Dalian in spring. I live in Singapore and have just joined this site, and am a @@@@ accountant who likes to teach English to Chinese-speakers! I visit China fairly regularly and hope you find it a nice place and its people too.
Cheers!
 

shane

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Member Type
Student or Learner
jwschang said:
Hi Shane. Read about you in the members' intro and just saw the photos on your site. They look great! I may be visiting Dalian in spring. I live in Singapore and have just joined this site, and am a @@@@ accountant who likes to teach English to Chinese-speakers! I visit China fairly regularly and hope you find it a nice place and its people too.
Cheers!

Hi jws (there has to be a better way of addressing you than that! ;) ), I'm glad you like my photos.

I have to say, I am impressed with your knowledge of English and English grammar - you put me to shame :oops:

If you do come to Dalian in the spring, let me know, and we can hook up for a beer. :D

Shane
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
J

jwschang

Guest
shane said:
Hi jws (there has to be a better way of addressing you than that! ;) ), I'm glad you like my photos.

I have to say, I am impressed with your knowledge of English and English grammar - you put me to shame :oops:

If you do come to Dalian in the spring, let me know, and we can hook up for a beer. :D

Shane

Hi Shane and TDOL

The J's for Justin, the WS is my Chinese name = Wen Seung (Hanyu Pinyin = Wen Xiong, wen as in word or writing, xiong as in male).

I grew up with English (as a big number did in Singapore and Malaysia). In singapore, it has always been English as the instruction medium. In Malaysia, it was changed to Malay, as a result of which the standard of English has fallen very sharply. We had good teachers of the language; I'm not in touch with the situation now (ain't a student nomore!) but in Singapore it's still good, I think.

Not as a compliment but the truth, Shane, your Chinese would be much better than mine. My grand-dad came from Guangdong province in the south, and I spoke mostly Cantonese (it has six tones, compared to Putonghua's four). Until about three years ago, my Putonghua was pretty poor. In 1995, when I made my first visit to China, I needed an interpreter at a meeting!!! Now its not too bad, but very little still when it comes to writing.

I have this kind of glad feeling when I see foreigners visiting China, and perhaps more so where they go there to teach English. I think it can build a lot of bridges between people. It'd be good, for example, if TDOL as a teacher could visit China and we'll all have a beer on Shane in Dalian!

When I read JNSummer's postings, I thought of what my friends in China tell me: Some of the school kids (as young as 12 or 13) can be pretty unruly, and the really difficult ones (including girls) can even beat up their local teachers. Some are spoilt and arrogant, because, say, their dad is some government official or big-short. I understand that this was more prevalent in the North than in the South. I hear that things have improved vastly over the last decade.

Cheers. :)
 

shane

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Member Type
Student or Learner
jwschang said:
When I read JNSummer's postings, I thought of what my friends in China tell me: Some of the school kids (as young as 12 or 13) can be pretty unruly, and the really difficult ones (including girls) can even beat up their local teachers. Some are spoilt and arrogant, because, say, their dad is some government official or big-short. I understand that this was more prevalent in the North than in the South. I hear that things have improved vastly over the last decade.

Cheers. :)

I'm pleased to report that I've never run into any situation like the one you have described!! ;)
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Please pardon the interruption, but the phrase is big shot. (You could also say head cheese, but that has a different flavor to it.)

(Sorry for the interruption, but that is about the only kind of contribution I can make to this thread.)

:wink:

[Edited to note that JWS's phrase was probably a typo anyhow.]
 
J

jwschang

Guest
RonBee said:
Please pardon the interruption, but the phrase is big shot. (You could also say head cheese, but that has a different flavor to it.)

(Sorry for the interruption, but that is about the only kind of contribution I can make to this thread.)

:wink:

[Edited to note that JWS's phrase was probably a typo anyhow.]

Yea, can't be big and short at the same time, unless sideways. :)
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
He was a big-short person: 4 feet tall and 310 pounds.

:D
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
Cas:

The main verb 'have seen' is not compatible with "for the past week", which is where you and I agree. :shock:


Shun:
I doubt that. "For the past week" is a member of the Past Family, which are compatible with Present Perfect:

Ex: They have stayed in this hotel for the past week.

== The structure is perfectly alright. :eek:

Yes. It's perfectly fine. :D Have you checked the verb's semantic structure? The use of the participle 'stayed' is synonymous with 'been', meaning existed, which expresses continuity in the past, and the reason it's compatible with 'for the past week'.

Contiunuity is inherent in the word "stay", no matter its form. Be it a verb "to stay" or a participle "stayed". 'stayed' is compatible with "for the past week" because both express inherent continuity.

Would you have another example or examples? Id like to continue testing whether compatibility is related to contunity or not.

Cas :D
 

Casiopea

VIP Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Member Type
Other
Cas explained:
Well, not necessarily. Just because a given speaker, native or non-native, feels there is no difference between, say, "I ate" and "I have eaten" doesn't prove they are the same. That is, the similarity is apparent only. Both actions ended, finished, are over. They seem similar, don't they, but they aren't.

Jws added:
Agreed. I may see no difference, someone else may see or mean a difference.

That's a very good point. Consider,

Alex: Have you eaten yet today?
Sam: Yes. I ate today.

'have eaten' and 'ate' appear to be synonymous. :D

Jws,
1. I think most (all??, including scientific ones?) definitions will have limitations. If we apply the Pareto Principle, it may be good enough that the definition covers the main gist; I think it cannot be completely comprehensive. Exceptions, specific contexts, etc will have to be dealt with by qualification, illustrations, etc.

Ain't that the gawd's honest truth! However, the present definition hasn't come close to covering the 'gist', as Shun's examples attest to.

Jws:
2. Trouble is, many students like "clear" rules, so the teacher is hard-pressed on this, to avoid confusing the student.

Yup. Been there, done that! Teachers, like books, don't have all the answers. That's why it's often a good idea to tell students as much as we know. Tell students, "Hey, here's the gist so far." Problem is, the present definitions don't get the gist right.

Jws:
3. I try to keep it simple (where possible) and "stupid". If the learner can first learn to use the language WITH mistakes but generally correctly, then the refinement comes later and gradually. Some educators may disagree with this viewpoint, like saying old habits die hard.

I agree. Learn as you go. Learning is but a process.

Cas :D
 
J

jwschang

Guest
RonBee said:
He was a big-short person: 4 feet tall and 310 pounds.

:D

Big shot, head cheese, top dog, head honcho, numero uno, what else?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top