Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
In Linguist List 11.1622, Ronald Sheen (Ronald_SheenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueUQTR.UQuebec.CA) writes: >David Fertig pointed out that there are >"semi-Britishisms that slip into the American version apparently unnoticed. >The most obvious is when the American narrator asks: "Where have all the >Teletubbies gone?", where an American would almost always say: "Where did >all the Teletubbies go?" > >I doubt this..."Where have all the Teletubbies gone?" and the other form are >both quite normal North American English. I agree that this is quite common (I grew up in the Midwest). But rather than simply agree, I would like to ask a semi-related question. 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. Thus, for me "I am gone" is at least as good, and probably better than, "I have gone". Until I saw Ronald Sheen's example above, I hadn't noticed that there is something else going on here: if a destination follows "gone" (or in Sheen's example, the trace of wh-movement--apologies if traces and tooth fairies fall into the same class for you :-)), "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 can summarize comments for the list. Mike Maxwell SIL Mike_Maxwell
sil.org