2
« on: February 17, 2013, 04:16:33 PM »
Sir, you should check your Google "facts" more closely. Here is what "Adrian" says in the LanguageLog site you referred me to: "you really do need to do a "sticky" blogpost about Google hits and what they mean. I defy anyone to find more than 30 examples of "will have had gone" on the internet.
[(myl) That's a good point — Google's usual merely egregious over-estimation really goes bananas in this case. Bing actually claims just 24 results. Google claims "about 249,000,000 results", but will only show us 69 of them; and at least 32 of those are quotes or re-publications of this Language Log post, leaving only 69-32 = 37 possible hits. And some of those are clearly typographical errors and the like.
So I think we might get higher than 30 real examples — but the validated total is going to be closer to 30 than to 249 million…"
To adapt to your standards of credibility, I will say that, in all my travels in North America, Europe, New Zealand and other Commonwealth countries (and in your own Luzon), and in my teaching of ESL, I have never heard the "I will have had gone.." construction as a future perfect.
Indeed, since you agree that the use of determining adverbs is the more elegant (I would say correct) way to establish aspect, one wonders why you didn't establish that in your original post.