Present perfect.

Tons   Wed Jan 04, 2006 7:58 am GMT
I'm told that the reply below is grammatically incorrect. Could someone tell me why?

A: My God! Look at that cast!
B: *I’ve broken my ankle in a skiing accident.
Kirk   Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:17 am GMT
<<I'm told that the reply below is grammatically incorrect. Could someone tell me why?

A: My God! Look at that cast!
B: *I’ve broken my ankle in a skiing accident.>>

It sounds odd to me but I believe some dialects of English would have such a construction (notably Antipodean ones).
Sho   Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:58 pm GMT
I believe it sounds odd to use present perfect tense when the sentence gives a indication of when the action occured. It goes well with less specific time indicators such as "once", though.
César   Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:16 pm GMT
I support Kirk. I would say that it sounds odd instead of grammatically incorrect.

I believe British people would say it like that. Any brit's feedback, please?
Sho   Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:59 pm GMT
correction
"gives a clear indication" is correct.
Felix the Cassowary   Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:35 pm GMT
To begin with I'll say I hate computers—I had most of a reply typed out and then my web browser crashed. We'll have to settle for the abridged version (at least of the first half. I needed to go off and do research for the second half, which is why my browser crashed).

<<It sounds odd to me but I believe some dialects of English would have such a construction (notably Antipodean ones).>>

Its one of those things that the more I think about it, the more wrong it seems, but if he had've just said it, I wouldn't've noticed anything odd about it at all, I think. It contrasts with something like "I sang a song" and "I sung a song", in which no matter how hard I think about it, I can never work out which one is correct. (OTOH, I'll always say "I've sung a song", never *"I've sang a song", from which I can conclude that "I sang a song" is probably the right one.)

Still, I think Germans and the like have a nack for using the PP when they could've got away with it, only the didn't, because they've done something wrong like used the full form of a verb instead of a contraction (i.e. have for 've, has for 's)—never do that (unless the grammar says you must, when you must).

As to Tons's "why", which I fear no-one has adequately covered yet, I think you'll find there's no adequate answer possible. Briefly the Standard English present perfect is a marker of the perfect aspect, which expresses a link between the present state and a past situation, which contrasts with its use in some other European languages where it's just become a way to talk of past situations. Why your little exchange doesn't express a link—after all, you're talking of a present state (leg in cast) and linking it back to a past situation (ankle breaking)—has got me beat, particu'ly at half past two in the morning.
M56   Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:57 pm GMT
It doesn't work because the broken ankle is a known fact to both speaker and hearer (a presupposed event) - so the present perfect cannot be used to provide more information about it. Present perfect is perfect for general statements, but as we become more detailed in our explanations, the past simple steps in.

For new facts, the pres. perf. is good.

I can't come to visit you today. I've broken my leg whilst skiing.
Damian   Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:49 pm GMT
***I believe British people would say it like that. Any brit's feedback, please? ***

Nope. "I broke my ankle in a skiing accident" would be the standard British response (except perhaps in Glasgow.....)
Kirk   Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:07 am GMT
<<This is trying to mystify it. No, it is incorrect pure and simple.>>

When language variation is the subject, things are often not cut-and-dry like that, Brennus. Felix has already commented that it's a possible form in Australian English (which I've also heard confirmed in other accounts of Australian English). Now, as Felix mentions, this form may be more likely to be heard in the spoken language (he did mention if someone used such a form while speaking it wouldn't stick out to him) than be seen in the written one for Australians. It not being a formal written form is far different from giving it a blanket "incorrect" status for the whole world. However, unless you're aiming to model your speech off of spoken AuE (which could be the case, I don't know the story behind the original poster of this thread) it'd be best to avoid since it is unattested in other varieties.