11.1644, Disc: Queen's English/American English
The LINGUIST Network
linguist at linguistlist.org
Thu Jul 27 19:38:23 UTC 2000
LINGUIST List: Vol-11-1644. Thu Jul 27 2000. ISSN: 1068-4875.
Subject: 11.1644, Disc: Queen's English/American English
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>
Reviews: Andrew Carnie: U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>
Associate Editors: Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U. <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
Scott Fults, E. Michigan U. <scott at linguistlist.org>
Jody Huellmantel, Wayne State U. <jody at linguistlist.org>
Karen Milligan, Wayne State U. <karen at linguistlist.org>
Assistant Editors: Lydia Grebenyova, E. Michigan U. <lydia at linguistlist.org>
Naomi Ogasawara, E. Michigan U. <naomi at linguistlist.org>
James Yuells, Wayne State U. <james at linguistlist.org>
Software development: John Remmers, E. Michigan U. <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
Sudheendra Adiga, Wayne State U. <sudhi at linguistlist.org>
Qian Liao, E. Michigan U. <qian at linguistlist.org>
Home Page: http://linguistlist.org/
The LINGUIST List is funded jointly by Eastern Michigan University,
Wayne State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.
Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>
=================================Directory=================================
1)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:14:21 EDT
From: Nitti45 at aol.com
Subject: Re: 11.1624, Disc: Queen's English/American English
2)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:21:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Robert Kurtz <kurtz at omni.cc.purdue.edu>
Subject: Re: 11.1643, Disc: Queen's English/American English
3)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:56:51 -0400
From: "Mills, Carl (MILLSCR)" <MILLSCR at UCMAIL.UC.EDU>
Subject: RE: 11.1624, Disc: Queen's English/American English
4)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:01:29 +0100
From: Michael Swan <MichaelSwan at grammar2.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Discussion: Queen's English / American English (gone)
-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:14:21 EDT
From: Nitti45 at aol.com
Subject: Re: 11.1624, Disc: Queen's English/American English
In a message dated 7/26/00 6:57:10 AM, Mike Maxwell writes:
>To my knowledge, "gone" is the only past participle (as opposed to passive
>participle) in modern English which can take a form of "be" as the Aux
>verb.
I too have noticed this fact, though I have never researched it whys and
wherefores. To continue the quotation with specific examples:
>Thus, for me "I am gone" is at least as good, and probably better than,"I
>have gone"...if a destination follows "gone"..., "have gone" is better; "is
>gone" is better when there is no destination. That is:
>
> I am/ ?have gone.
>
> I ?am/ have gone to the store.
>
> Where ??are/ have they gone?
>
>Note also "He has been gone for several hours now."
>
>This would be explicable if "gone" were ambiguous between an adjective
>and a
>past participle, but it fails every other test I can think of for
>adjective-hood. And of course it seems unlikely to be a passive.
>Has anyone looked into this? My edition (1979) of Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech
>and Svartvik, which discusses nearly everything else about English :-),has
>says nothing to say about this....
I have not seen any published research on this matter, but I can offer
one 'off the cuff' suggestion as to the possible reason for this. Here it is:
Up through the time of Early Modern English, verbs might have taken one
of two verbs as temporal auxiliaries: "to have" or "to be." The choice was
governed by the consideration of whether or not the main verb was one
involving motion or some other change of state. In the latter case, the verb
"to be" was indicated. Thus, "He *has* seen," but "He *is* come," for
example. (This, incidentally, is still the rule today in German.) At any
rate, this business of "I *am* gone," and so forth just might be a holdover
from that era.
Again, this is not by any means a definitive statement on this issue; it
is merely a suggestion.
Cordially yours,
Richard S. Kaminski
<Nitti45 at aol.com>
-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:21:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Robert Kurtz <kurtz at omni.cc.purdue.edu>
Subject: Re: 11.1643, Disc: Queen's English/American English
We've seen a number of examples from (American) English in which a
participle verb form follows BE, e.g. "I am gone", etc. Mike Maxwell
points out that BE+gone is generally not used if followed by
a "destination", as in:
I have gone to the store.
? I am gone to the store.
Doug Wilson points out examples of BE+participle containing RISEN and
FINISHED. We could also add DONE to the list. The question arises
whether these participle forms are really verbs or adjectives; Mike's
observation above suggests that they are adjectives. Along the same
lines, we may argue that DONE can be a transitive verb when HAVE is the
AUX, but not with BE:
Have you done your homework?
Are you done with your homework?
After you've done this side, start on that one.
After you're done on this side, start on that one.
I haven't done it yet.
I'm not done with it yet
...as opposed to:
*Are you done your homework?
*After you're done this side, start on that one.
*I'm not done it yet.
But wait! Although the common assumption when using the term "American"
seems to be specifically United States, if we think of the label in
continental/hemispheric terms, it is relevant to note that I have heard
the three starred sentences above spoken by three different Anglophone
Canadians (all from Ontario, I believe). As far as I could tell, the
meaning was identical to that expressed by HAVE+participle in my dialect;
i.e., "I'm not done it yet" did not imply that the speaker had started,
whereas "I'm not done with it yet" does carry such an implication. I
cannot recall hearing this construction with any participle other than
DONE, but it would be interesting to know if others have studied this and
what implications it has for our discussion.
Robert Kurtz
Graduate Student
Department of Audiology and Speech Science
Purdue University
USA
-------------------------------- Message 3 -------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:56:51 -0400
From: "Mills, Carl (MILLSCR)" <MILLSCR at UCMAIL.UC.EDU>
Subject: RE: 11.1624, Disc: Queen's English/American English
Mike Maxwell notes sentences like:
"He has been gone for several hours now."
Sentences like this frequently reduce to
"He's been gone for several hours now."
And such sentences, when re-stressed, at least in North America,
are frequently uttered as:
He is been gone for several hours now."
Carl Mills
-------------------------------- Message 4 -------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:01:29 +0100
From: Michael Swan <MichaelSwan at grammar2.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Discussion: Queen's English / American English (gone)
Mike Maxwell asks about adjectival active past participles like 'gone'.
I think there is actually a whole small group of non-passive past
participles which can be used more or less adjectivally when the reference
is to a state rather than an action/event/whatever. Examples (from my
British usage):
RETIRED
Compare: My parents are both retired now.
Three of the directors have retired this year.
ADVANCED
Compare: Her English is very advanced.
His command of the language has advanced a good deal.
FADED
Compare: Those flowers are all faded.
Over the years, the colours have faded.
SWOLLEN
Compare: My ankles are swollen.
His leg has swollen up to twice its size.
FINISHED
Compare: 'How's the painting going?' 'I'm finished.'
I've finished the painting.
(Compare also: I'm done.)
GROWN UP
Compare: She looks very grown up now.
The children have grown up and left home.
RECOVERED
Compare: I hope you are fully recovered.
They have all recovered and returned to work.
STOPPED
Compare: Why are all those cars stopped at the roadside?
Why have we stopped?
CAMPED
Compare: We're camped in a field by the river.
We've camped here for the last three nights.
PARKED
Compare: Where are you parked?
I've parked the car behind the house, OK?
Some of these can be used as prenominal adjectives: 'a retired colonel',
'an advanced student', 'faded glory', 'swollen ankles'. And there are
others that be used adjectivally before nouns but maybe not (at least in my
dialect) after a copula: 'fallen leaves', 'developed countries', 'an escaped
prisoner', 'vanished civilisations', 'a collapsed lung'.
And there are others that can be used prenominally, but only when when
modified: 'a well-read person' (but not *'a read person'), 'a much-travelled
man', 'recently-arrived immigrants'.
There's a note on this in my 'Practical English Usage' (second edition OUP
1995).
Michael Swan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-11-1644
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list