Zajoman  +  565429 Sat, 13 Sep 08 12:12 AM Hi there, people. This has been going through my mind for quite a while, so here I go. "We've walked into the middle of a war that is/has already started." In the film, they say "has", which sounds naturally to me. But "is" sounds naturally to me, too. I mean, the war was started at some point in the past and therefore it really is in a state we can call "started", so it "is started". So my question is, are both "has" and "is" correct or does "is" have a different meaning here? Thank you very much for any replies. - Zajoman Zajoman Joined on Fri, Sep 12 2008 New Member 34 - Zajoman

	Philip  +  565437 Sat, 13 Sep 08 12:35 AM I see no difference in meaning, if in fact "is started" is correct.  I would definitely say "has started", keeping in mind that "that's started" could be a contraction with either 'is' or 'has'. Philip Joined on Thu, Jun 23 2005 Veteran Member 8,737 At reise er at leve! - H. C. Andersen Contractions

	Avangi  +  565726 Sat, 13 Sep 08 11:56 PM Zajoman “ it really is in a state we can call "started"  ”   I see nothing wrong with it.  The past participle can serve as an adjective, or as part of a verb tense.  You can even use transitive passive, instead of intransitive: "The war has been started."  But we wouldn't say, "This is a started war."   You also hear "is begun" and "is become," though they're not as common as they used to be. As a "state," we may think of the internal combustion engine in a car.  "The car is started."  That is, it's "running."  There's a greater sense of immediacy (because of the state) than with "has started," at least to my ear.  I suppose once it stops, we must then say "it had started."   - A. Avangi Joined on Mon, Nov 19 2007 Veteran Member 8,180 ". . . le plaisir delicieux et toujours nouveau d'une occupation inutile." - Henri de Regnier Verbs, Tenses