caa a22 4500 386328579 CHVBK 20180307111702.0 cr unu---uuuuu 161130e198903 xx s 000 0 eng 10.1017/S0022226700012081 doi S0022226700012081 pii (NATIONALLICENCE)cambridge-10.1017/S0022226700012081 Salkie Raphael Brighton Polytechnic and University of Poitiers Perfect and pluperfect: what is the relationship? [Elektronische Daten] [Raphael Salkie] The English (present) perfect (e.g. I have gone) has been extensively studied in the theoretical literature on tense and aspect. The pluperfect (I had gone) has by contrast received relatively little attention, and the relationship between the present perfect and the pluperfect has been virtually ignored. Descriptive grammars of English also tend to say little about the latter two issues, beyond distinguishing cases such as (1)-(6), where the pluperfect seems to be the ‘past of the perfect', from instances like (7)-(11), where the pluperfect is the ‘past of the past' (cf. Thomson & Martinet, 1969: 112-13; Berland-Delépine, 1971: 95-6; Guitard, 1966: 206-7; Palmer, 1974: 54): Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989 Journal of Linguistics Cambridge University Press 25/1(1989-03), 1-34 0022-2267 25:1<1 1989 25 LIN https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012081 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012081 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Salkie Raphael Brighton Polytechnic and University of Poitiers NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Journal of Linguistics Cambridge University Press 25/1(1989-03), 1-34 0022-2267 25:1<1 1989 25 LIN CC0 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-cambridge