romeo.alpha wrote:Cainntear wrote:Modern grammar references are written descriptively, i.e. based on reporting observed patterns. These are taken from massive corpora of genuine native language, so it's highly unlikely that they would repeat this if it was not the normal usage of the language, and one single solitary person angrily shouting otherwise on the internet is not going to have me change my mind.
You might need to question whether the sources you're referring to actually are descriptive, when they're operating on prescritptions. What I'm saying about "had" is descriptive. What you're arguing with it being something like Vorvergangenheit in German is a prescription.If you can't find me an academic reference, then at least provide an example from real usage, not one you made up yourself specifically to justify your point.
You seem to be confused about what descriptive grammar is. I'm a native speaker of English. Anything I say in English is real usage.
That's not quite how descriptive grammar works.
First up, it's possible that you are a speaker of a minority dialect where the past perfect works that way -- if so, descriptive linguistics would describe your usage as valid, but rare. You did not criticise Iversen for using a dialectal form you didn't like, you went off on a borderline-racist rant saying that he was absolutely wrong, and that your way was the only way.
Secondly, what a native speaker says in English is real usage, when they are not giving conscious thought to the process of speaking. An example you invent expressly to describe a rule you believe is true is led by the rule, not your intuitive grasp of the language -- that makes it not real usage. This is why descriptive linguistics examines millions of words of language, rather than just the grammarian stating the rules as he believes them to be.
No, perfect aspect is from the perspective of the speaker. It's relative to the present, not to the past, unless you explicitly state the point on the timeline (which you can also move to the future).
... when you combine the perfect aspect with the past tense you are explicitly moving it to the past. You cannot move the present perfect or the past perfect to the future with a plain adverbial:
*
*
...you have to make it future through the verb:
* I'll have finished by the time you get here.