18.2685, Qs: English Supercompound Constructions

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List: Vol-18-2685. Fri Sep 14 2007. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 18.2685, Qs: English Supercompound Constructions

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews: Randall Eggert, U of Utah  
         <reviews at linguistlist.org> 

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, 
and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Dan Parker <dan at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it
is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have
taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.

===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 14-Sep-2007
From: Dmitri Sitchinava < dmsichinava at yandex.ru >
Subject: English Supercompound Constructions

 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:04:17
From: Dmitri Sitchinava [dmsichinava at yandex.ru]
Subject: English Supercompound Constructions
E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=18-2685.html&submissionid=156242&topicid=8&msgnumber=1  


Dear Colleagues,

I study typologically the so-called ''supercompoud forms'' and I would like
to ask you whether any paper exist on an English supercompound construction
alike to the French passé surcomposé or German ''Perfekt II'', viz. ''I
have had done'', ''he has had seen'' and the like.

It is rather frequently attested in the Internet, as Google shows, although
it seems to be hardly normative. Here this constuction is rejected as
''wrong'':
http://www.usingenglish.com/forum/general-language-discussions/432-difference-between-have-had-done-have-done-did.html

Is anything known about socio-linguistic or territorial status of its spread?

Thank you in advance. 

Linguistic Field(s): Sociolinguistics
                     Typology





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-18-2685