Anonymous  +  118350 Thu, 14 Jul 05 06:18 PM What's the difference in meaning between the present perfect and present perfect continuous tenses? For example: (1) She has worked here for 20 years (present perfect) (2) She has been working here for 20 years (present perfect continuous) The only difference I can find is that in sentence (1), she may not be working here henceforth, whereas in sentence (2), the implication is that she still works here. Is this the only difference? I don't think sentence (1) implies she definitely no longer works here, and if she does still work here, then the meanings of sentences (1) and (2) are the same. Anonymous Tenses, Present Perfect, Perfect Progressive

	CalifJim  +  118694 Sat, 16 Jul 05 07:46 AM The difference - or the amount of difference - is connected with the particular verb in a particular usage.  Some verbs show little distinction (like "work").  The difference is more obvious with other verbs. I've watched Casa Blanca.  (at some time before now - maybe even two or three times - I had the experience of watching that movie from beginning to end - I had a "watching-that-movie" experience.) I've been watching Casa Blanca. (and am still watching it - I am currently undergoing the "watching-that-movie" experience - I've just now paused in that activity to tell you about it.) The non-continuous form is usually consistent with an event or accomplishment interpretation. The continuous form is consistent with an activity interpretation. CalifJim Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004 California Veteran Member 22,383 "There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche Verbs, Present Perfect, Perfect Progressive

	Pyewacket  +  118700 Sat, 16 Jul 05 08:08 AM Well said, Calif Jim. I've encountered lots of these unusual nuances and have tried to understand it, but I like your succinct explaination.   Pyewacket Joined on Wed, Jul 13 2005 Northern California, USA Junior Member 67 "The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware." -- Henry Miller Present Perfect, Perfect Progressive

	sitifan  +  679860 Wed, 25 Feb 09 07:36 AM 1. Amy has been writing the letter for two hours. 2. Amy has written the letter for two hours. #1 is supposed to be correct. Is #2 also acceptable? sitifan Joined on Fri, Mar 14 2008 Taiwan Full Member 230 Thank you very much for your reply.

	Goodman  +  679864 Wed, 25 Feb 09 07:54 AM # 1 sounds fine to my ear. # 2 - is sounds a bit stiff due to the recent time, "2 hours". Pres. perf works better with a longer time span. I have studied English for 15 years. It's fine If it's:  Amy has written letters to her boyfirend in English for two months but without response. Goodman Joined on Mon, Nov 7 2005 Senior Member 3,816 The name says it all! Countries, United Kingdom, Great Britain, Languages

	CalifJim  +  680077 Wed, 25 Feb 09 08:12 PM sitifan “ 1. Amy has been writing the letter for two hours. 2. Amy has written the letter for two hours. #1 is supposed to be correct. Is #2 also acceptable? ” I don't find that #2 can be contextualized in a way that makes it idiomatic and acceptable, no. These would strike me as correct: Amy has been writing that letter for two hours.  [continuous application of effort at that task until the moment of utterance] Amy has written letters for two hours [today / every day this week].   [one block of time occupied by the activity of letter writing; once or repeated, depending on the adverbs] CJ CalifJim

	sitifan  +  680710 Fri, 27 Feb 09 05:57 AM 3. Amy has written three letters for two hours. 4. Amy has written three letters since lunchtime. Are the above sentences acceptable? sitifan Sentences

	CalifJim  +  680717 Fri, 27 Feb 09 06:07 AM 3.  No. 4.  Yes. CJ CalifJim