One for the linguists

There's a certain verb construction which I admit I've mostly heard in Westerns, but which I've also heard from a few of my rural-Southern-dwelling relatives, exclusively male from what I can recall. It appears to be a variation on the auxiliary used with the past participle, e.g.:

You done picked the wrong sonuvabitch to fuck with.
He done got hisself in a whole mess of trouble.

Semantically, from what little data I have, this construction appears to associate with negative situations from which the subject of the sentence cannot extricate itself. More positive situations sound weird to me:

?She done fixed supper for everyone.
?He done took the car to the shop.

(That said, I also wonder whether the above two sentences are valid BEV, as they sound reminiscent of sentences I've read in some of Labov's work.)

I'm curious whether the construction also carries an aspect of irrevocability; the past participle typically (though not always) signifies a completed action, along the lines of the perfective aspect, and I'm wondering whether the done-participle in this dialect indicates a completed action that cannot be undone or corrected. (Most perfective verbs indicate actions that cannot be undone -- one can't really un-eat a sandwich or un-walk to the store -- but presumably one can apologise for one's rudeness and thereby un-pick the wrong sonuvabitch to fuck with, unless the wrong sonuvabitch isn't going to accept an apology and wants you to know that.)

Anyone know of any studies on this topic, or where I might start looking? (I'm so spoiled by Citeseer; if there's a similar search engine for linguistics papers, I've managed to miss it so far.)