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

grammar concern

Anonymous — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:08:16 GMT

PWe are printing an award for a teacher and it's not immediately obvious where the mistake is. He has provided guidance and service from August 2006 to August 2008, but we are printing the award before his term ends. Is it present perfect progressive (has/have been)?

1. He has provided guidance in physics since his arrival in August 2006.

2. He has provided guidance in physics since he arrived in August 2006.

3. He has provided guidance in physics since he arrived in August 2006.

4. He provided guidance in physics from August 2006 to August 2008.

5. By the time he leaves in August 2008, he will have provided guidance in physics since arriving/his arrival? in August 2006.

A recommendation?

Thanks

-A

Re: IN SPEECH

Clive — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:31:08 GMT

Hi,
I was listening to some types of speeches and have some questions.

1.When someone says this, does he have to make it known that it is quoted? Not if he doesn't want to. Such 'rules' are not governed by grammar. A teacher, for example, may insist that a student identify every quotation. I think the written version should be in quotation marks because not being in quotation marks doesn't make sense to me.

Next time is later again.<<< This doesn't make any sense to me. What does it mean?

2.Can we have a present perfect after a dependant clause like "After you heard it" in the past tense? It certainly sounds odd in this example. I can't think of another example in which it sounds OK, although I don't like to say an absolute 'No, never'.

After you heard it, you have decided to come back again. Thank you. Nice to see you all here again.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: PASSIVE VOICE with Present Perfect Continuous

CalifJim — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:20:33 GMT

New2grammar
It sounds like Joe has been continuously kicking the ball for the past 5 years.

Not any more than the active form says so. Joe has been kicking that ball for the past five years. Transforming a silly active into a passive is not going to de-sillify it!

The alternate interpretation is reasonable, however: Joe has kicked the ball for a period of time many times throughout the past five years.

Compare: Alexandra has been working on that quilt for ten years. / George has been writing his novel for 18 years.

I've been "wanting" to visit Paris all my life.

Viceidol — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:21:02 GMT

Hello, everyone. My grammar book says the following example is true:

I've been wanting to visit Paris all my life.

The book says "normally want cannot be used in progrssive tense, but it does in this case (present perfect continuous tense)" (p.s. The book is not written by a native speaker)

May I ask if what the book says is true? Please help me with this, thank you very much!!

Re: Confusing Grammar question

Cool Breeze — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:33:47 GMT

Anonymous
1.) The person at the door was he/The person at the door was him.
The person at the door was I/ The person at the door was me.

2) It has changed/It has been changed.
Do these sentences mean the same thing? Is one of them grammatically awkward/incorrect? both of them seem to be "present perfect". is that true?

1. Both are correct but he and I are used in very formal writing only. The grammatical subject is the person.

2. The first sentence is in the active voice and the second is in the passive voice. Both are correct and mean different things. At least usually, it has been changed suggests that somebody has intentionally changed "it". However, English is often rather vague and inexact with regard to structures like this, and it may be possible to find examples where no such intention is involved.

Confusing Grammar question

Anonymous — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:13:57 GMT

Dear Readers ,
I have a confusion regarding the following sentences
1.) The person at the door was he/The person at the door was him.
The person at the door was I/ The person at the door was me.

In such sentences what is the subject and what is the object? The problem is that if you flip the sentences meaning doesn't seem to change but subjects and objects do. The confusion is whether to use object pronoun "him/me" or subject pronoun "I".

To me, it just sounds better with "him/me" but textbooks seem to use "he/I" instead. For eg. "No one knew that the Thief was I".
I asked a professional editor and native english speaker. She was not confident but preferred "him/me".

2) It has changed/It has been changed.
Do these sentences mean the same thing? Is one of them grammatically awkward/incorrect? both of them seem to be "present perfect". is that true?

Any help will be much appreciated.
Thanks
Zia

Re: in Israeli prison

optilang — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:10:56 GMT

New2grammar
A has been sentenced to 10 years and has served 5 of them (so far).

So you're saying that without has it sounds like served is in past tense instead of present perfect reusing the first 'has'. - Yes, for me

New2grammar
I have paid and signed the paper.

I interpret signed here as present perfect tense, borrowing the have before paid.What do you think? - I agree

He has been selected and has played for the team 5 times this year.

He has played and scored for his team.

Maybe it's as a result of the separation by selected in the first sentence, but for me it sounds better with has repeated.

The second sentence, for me, sounds OK as it is.

Sorry, I don't think I'm being much help on this one.

Re: in Israeli prison

New2grammar — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 20:59:53 GMT

A has been sentenced to 10 years and has served 5 of them (so far).

So you're saying that without has it sounds like served is in past tense instead of present perfect reusing the first 'has'.

New2grammar
I have paid and signed the paper.

I interpret signed here as present perfect tense, borrowing the have before paid.What do you think?

Re: it is the first time

Tuongvan — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:02:37 GMT

Dear Grammar Geek , I also think the way you do. I have consulted a lot of grammar books ,and all of them say the present perfect must be used after "it/this is the first/second/third...time ".I think " this is the first time I am participating in ,,, " is not good English .

Re: If you haven't .... I woud

Liveinjapan — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:31:41 GMT

CalifJim
Doesn't it bother you that a present perfect tense in an if clause is used with would?
Isn't the past usually used with would in that case?
It is unusual.

Thanks, CJ. I understand would love = want to.

You pointed what I'm stuck with.
I think the sentence is technically not a conditional, because Steve is going to run the ad here whether the audience has seen it or not. Actually he does, I've seen it on iTunes.

I remember that my grammar book says similar cases:
"I'm going to get a beer if you want some" and "I'll get a beer if you want some" are a bit different in meanig.
The former indicates the speaker is going to get a beer whether the listener wants some or not, while the latter indicates it's up to the listener that the speaker will get a beer.

Whew! What do you think?