Search results for 'tag:Constructions tag:Present perfect' matching tags 'Constructions' and 'Present perfect'

Re: was changed or has been changed?

Mister Micawber — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:56:33 GMT

.
Hello, myelleven, and welcome to English Forums.

It sounds that was changed/was __+ed and has been changed/has been __+ed have similar meanings..isn't it?-- Often, yes. The event is the same, but the present perfect connects the event to Now in some way.

and 1 of my friend told me that 'has been __+ed' is something that always happen. for example 'has been constructed' means from past until today, the construction still not finish..is it true?-- Not necessarily true. That is only one use of the present perfect, as in 'I have eaten three bowls of rice so far'-- the eating may continue. If I say, 'I have eaten three bowls of rice and I am stuffed', then the eating is finished.

Re: Present Perfect (americans)

Diamondrg — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 07:40:10 GMT

Hi, YSchneider. I am not a native speaker and this is indeed a tough grammar point for non-native speakers.

Here is an extract from CGEL*:

Did you lock the front door? [5]

in a domestic situation where it is known that the front door is locked at bedtime every night. In that case, [5] is more or less equivalent to Did you
lock the front door at bedtime? (Incidentally, in [5], "the" in "the front door" is another case of situational definiteness; cfS.Uff.)

--

The ATTITUDINAL PAST, used with verbs expressing volition or mental state, reflects the tentative attitude of the speaker, rather than past time.
In the following pairs, both the present and past tenses refer to a present state of mind, but the latter is somewhat more polite:

Do/Did you want to see me now?
I wonder/wondered if you could help us.

--

Where did you put my purse ? [ 1 ]
Where have you put my purse? [2]

The purpose of both of these questions may be to find the purse; but in [1] the speaker seems to ask the addressee to remember a past action; while in [2] the speaker apparently concentrates on the purse's present whereabouts. There are many such cases.

--

Leaving aside such virtual equivalences, we may now focus on the difference between the two constructions, contrasting the meanings of the simple past given in 4.14 with the following meanings of the simple present perfective:

(a) STATE LEADING UP TO THE PRESENT

That house has been empty for ages.
Have you known my sister for long?

(b) INDEFINITE EVENT(S) IN A PERIOD LEADING UP TO THE PRESENT

Have you (ever) been to Florence?
All our children have had measles.

(c) HABIT (ie recurrent event) IN A PERIOD LEADING UP TO THE PRESENT

Mr Terry has sung in this choir ever since he was a boy.
The province has suffered from disastrous floods throughout its history.

Of these meanings, (a) corresponds to the 'state past' use of the simple past, but differs from it in specifying that the state continues at least up to the present moment (cf: That house was empty for ages - but now it's been sold); (b) corresponds to the 'event past', but differs from it in that the past time in question is indefinite rather than definite (cf: Did you go to Florence (last summer) ?); (c) corresponds to the 'habitual past', but, as with (a), the period identified must continue up to the present.

Note In AmE there is a tendency to use the past tense in preference to the present perfective, especially for the indefinite past; eg: Did you ever go to Florence ? (c/4.13 Note lb], 4.22 Note [a ]).

--

Have you seen the Javanese Art Exhibition? [yet]
Did you see the Javanese Art Exhibition? [when it was here]

The first of these implies that the Exhibition is still open; the second that the Exhibition has finished. From this concern with a period still existing at the present time, it is only a short step to the second implication often associated with the present perfective, viz that the event is recent. The simple present perfective is often used to report a piece of news:

_., , > the news? The president has resigned.

Because of this connotation of recency, B's reply in the following exchange must be considered absurdly inappropriate:

A: Has the postman left any letters? B: Yes, he did six months ago.

Since postmen in general deliver letters daily, the implicit time zone in this case would be no longer than a day.

[Note] In AmE, the simple past is often preferred to the present perfective for the variants of the indefinite past discussed in this section. Compare [6 ], for example, with Did the children come home yet? <esp AmE). Other AmE examples are: I just came back; You told me already; and without an adverb: /*m tired -1 had a long day.

* A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (Quirk et al.]

Re: "If I were" in past

MrPedantic — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:56:39 GMT

I think the difference is that "be" is a main verb, in the original example; but in the "duelling" example, it is part of a compound passive construction.

(Also, in the original, you wouldn't say "If I were to be stronger,...". So there's no reason to use a present perfect version of the latter for the "past".)

MrP

Re: until now

Mr Wordy — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:34:03 GMT

Tuongvan
To sum up, can we say as follows?:

Until now + present perfect(continuous) : the action in the present perfect (continuous) in still continuing at the present moment .

-He is incorruptible .That 's why ,Until now ,he has been living in that rickety house (He is still living in it now )

Until now+ simple past (continuous): the action in the simple past(continuous) is not continuing at the present moment.' Until now 'in this case is similar in meaning to 'until recently'.

-He is incorruptible .That 's why ,Until now (=until recently) ,he was still living in that rickety house (He is not living in it now ).

I would appreciate it very much if you give your comments

In this context, "until now" strongly suggests that he has just moved, is in the process of moving, or is just about to move. So, the question is: does the choice of "was" or "has been" influence this range of possibilities? The presence or absence of "still" is another complicating factor.

I think I might have looked at this construction so much now that I no longer actually know what I think, but here's my best shot. Others may take a different view!

1. Until now, he has been living... -- allows all possibilities (just moved, moving, just about to move).

2. Until now, he has still been living... -- could allow all possibilities, the same as (1), with "still" suggesting that he stayed in the old house longer than might have been expected; or "still" could be emphasising that he is living there up to and including the present moment.

3. Until now, he was living... -- I guess this must, as you say, mean that he has already (recently) moved, but it doesn't sound quite right to me.

4. Until now, he was still living... -- same as (3), except "still" presumably must mean that he stayed in the old house longer than might have been expected (because of "was", it can't mean that he is still living there up to and including the present moment).

To me, there is an awkwardness about using "until now" with "living", which is more pronounced with versions (3) and (4). In fact, version (4) really just sounds like bad English to me.

Re: conditional

Marius Hancu — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:58:04 GMT

>To me, 'is likely' denotes present time

No, it looks into the future, as any forecast would, and this is one.

Simple present or even present perfect are used in constructions which refer to the future.

Tense and time are not the same.

Re: to focus - Passive or Active voice?

CalifJim — Fri, 16 May 2008 17:58:01 GMT

Lone Swordsman
All this time John's [John has] been focused on blah-blah-blah...
...All this time John's [John is] focused on blah-blah-blah...

Passive? No. There's nothing passive here, because there is no agent either implicit or explicit (i.e., there is nobody who is doing something). focused is an adjective. Be careful. Not every word with -ed is a verb in every sentence where it occurs. These two sentences are just the same statement in two different tenses. Note these:

John is ... [present]

John was ... [past]

John will be ... [future]

John has been ... [present perfect]

John had been ... [past perfect]

Complete any of the phrases above by adding any of these:

frightened of snakes, interested in science, focused on his studies, tired of reading, fascinated by insects, bored with grammar.

None of the resulting sentences has a passive construction.

Re: present perfect in instructions

miriam — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:24:51 GMT

The present perfect is not used for giving instructions in the examples posted here.

The instructions are in the imperative mood (bake the cake, take it out, put it in a wrap, etc.). The present perfect makes sense (even though the constructions are actually wordy) because it indicates the order of the different steps to prepare a meal: you take the cake out of the oven only after you have baked it. Unnecessary, perhaps, because it is obvious, but again, the present perfect is not being used here for giving instructions.

Miriam

Re: Reported Speech

miriam — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:36:47 GMT

Hello. Sorry to hear you're feeling uncomfortable with this type of activity. But you're not alone: I would be, too!

The sentences lack context, which makes it difficult to tell when tense changes are necessary and when they are not (among other things).

There is one sentence that is wrong without a doubt: # 7. The sentence in direct speech uses the present continuous, and the reporting verb (added) is in the past tense, so it really makes no sense to use a construction with "will" to report that statement. You should either keep the same tense (present continuous) or change to past continuous. Sentence #6 has a similar mistake. The decision, however, is sometimes difficult to make since I have no idea when the original statements were made, when they are/were reported, and, also important, whether what was said still applies at the time of reporting or it doesn't.

The rest of the sentences seem OK in general, except for a few details, such as dates and time references, and person changes. For example, in # 8 you retain "a year ago" instead of changing it to some other expression like "the year before" or "the previous year". Again, though, that would depend on several variables, the moment of reporting among them. Also, in #10 you changed "our customers" to "his customers" (why not "their" customers?).

And you're not consistent with verb changes. In # 1, you shifted from the present perfect to the past perfect. But then, in other sentences, such as # 2, you retained the tense from the sentence in direct speech.

I know this isn't much help, but it will -hopefully- point you in the direction of your mistakes and/or inconsistencies.

When we're taught indirect speech, we're told to remember the "golden rule": change verb tenses. But the truth is that it always depends on the context and the content itself, on the people speaking and the time of speaking.

Give these sentences another try, please, and let's see what happens?

Miriam

Re: surprising rewards/surprise party

Creativeguru — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:09:19 GMT

I wonder why it's "surprising rewards" in the above instead of 'surprise rewards" while it's a "surprise party" rather than "surprising party." Isn't "surprising rewards" similar in construction to "surprise party?" >>NO, I dn't think so

'Surprising rewards' is continuos future tense tense while 'surprise party' is present perfect

Re: correct sentences 24/11

Teo — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:09:54 GMT

They won't smoke ever since they saw a film on lung cancer.

What does "won't" mean here?