“Take and…”? I’ve never heard anyone use that expression.
But you wouldn’t have been going to the market then. How do you rephrase “I would have been going to go to the market when she arrived?”
“I would have been intending to go to the market when she arrived?”
“I would have been going to the market later when she arrived?”
(And obviously not “I would have gone to the market when she arrived” etc.)
OK, I suppose they work. But you seemed to imply there was a simpler collection of tenses that would mean the same thing.
I see what you’re saying, and I cannot off-hand see any English rules that sentence is breaking. So I guess that construction is grammatical. It’s still a bit clunky and difficult to parse.
Hold on a minute.
First, English has no synthetic future tense (where you tag an ending on the verb, like the -s of 3rd person singular present or -d of the past), but it traditionally is considered to have an analytic future tense formed with the auxiliaries “shall” and “will.” It also has a lot of periphrastic forms used for progressive tenses and shades of meaning – and the “going to” forms fall into this category. They are perfectly good English, with a colloquial air to them, and are used in formal writing only to make the careful distinction between a simple single-action future and a continuing-action future. E.g., “I did not say that I will finish the project next week; I said that I am going to be finishing the project next week. It may not be done until two weeks from today.”
Now, while the rest-of-the-country stereotype is that New Englanders are dour descendants of the Pilgrims and Puritans, the fact of the matter is that large numbers of immigrants settled the area in the 1800s – French Canadians who became Franco-Americans, Irish (think about what you know about Boston political history and law enforcement), and a mixture of European groups, from Poles to Portuguese.
But among the major groups on non-Anglophone immigrants there was a common thread – it was syntactically sound in certain circumstances to form sentences in which future action was described by use of the present tense plus adverbial reference to future time. And that carried over into colloquial New England English as she is spoke today.
With reference to the Upstate New York Phantom Possessive, yeah, I heard it a lot and it did bug me somewhat. But nowhere near as much as certain other uses: “Hey, they’ve got hot water heaters on sale at Walmart’s!”
OK, I say “crick”. People from the town after which my high school was named are “Crickers”. Anyone who said “Turtle Creek” was just being an ass.
I also drop my infinitives (“The car needs washed”), unless I am speaking formally. I also continually jag others when they do this. I’m just a bastard, I guess.
As a point of reference, they do this in Chicago, too. I don’t notice it quite as much these days, but I will use construction such as “I’m goin’ over to (the) Jewel’s (the local grocery chain)” or “Did you hear about that sale they’ve got going on at Target’s?” I have no idea where it comes from, but I always have to stutter my speech if I’m to avoid it.
Northeastern American dialect pronounces “creek” with a /I/ phoneme, not an /i/ phoneme – a “creak” is the sound of a door opening in a B horror movie or on AOL. 
And I should have appended that the lowercase “c” suggests that the creek in question is a stream larger than a brook and smaller than a river; the Native American tribe of Creeks are pronounced to rhyme with the squeaky door, particularly when arthritic.
I don’t understand what you mean here.
I will finish the project = I am going to finish the project.
I will be finishing the project = I am going to be finishing the project.
Right?
I see no difference whatsoever.
There is a subtle difference between “going to” and “will.” Whether most English speakers really make a distinction between the two is a matter of debate, but when I taught English, my teaching texts made a distinction between the two forms.
The difference is that the first usage, with the simple future, gives an expected time of completion; the second (which I used “going to finish” rather than the progressive “will be finishing” for, by the way) implies scheduling the work to complete – a rather subtle shade of meaning, but one that can be important, as in a deadline project.
It’s funny how worked up English speakers get about such minor differences in speech. In terms of the world’s languages and their potential for dialectal variation, this is truly pissant stuff. I mean, come on… copula deletion bothers you? You don’t know you’re born.
Hey naw, yous guys (yinz, if you’re from the left side of the state) need to stop pickin’ on us poor Pennsylvanians and the way we talk. Let’s see…born to New England parents and raised in SE PA (just outside hardcore PA Dutch country) and I can talk just fine.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to outen the light, head down to the bahn, and throw the horse (hoss on alternate days) ovah the fence some hay.