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

Re: Is it possible to use present perfect with "long ago"?

Lovebug — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:59:29 GMT

Hi Goodman.

I have been living in California since 3 years ago = that'll be so unacceptable in my camp.
I have been living in California for the past 3 years. = that's acceptable and will make a student pass their English test in a non-native land.

Yes, the word 'ago' with a present perfect tense, will appear to be a direct translation from a dialect or another language usually non-native English. I see this being practised.

cheers.

Re: How long have you been here? vs How long are you here for?

Grammar Geek — Thu, 10 May 2007 19:37:11 GMT

CJ, you're brilliant! I wouldn't have thought of mistranslation. And I never noticed the "exercise on present perfect." Good thing you're around.

(I get to see people who are in town for business for a tiny social visit, so the thought of not knowing how long the person was in town for didn't seem that odd. It would be if that person was going to be my guest, of course.)

Re: Translation into English 19/02

CalifJim — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 18:04:45 GMT

Apparently I was not still on-line. (I never sign off so it looks like I'm always on-line anyway.)

Why the past after How long ...?

To show a break between the stay and the present moment. In other words, the end of the stay took place before this conversation started. (The present perfect would indicate otherwise.)

CJ

Re: Translation into English 19/02

Hela — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:59:25 GMT

Thank you Jim, vous Ãªtes super gentil

Since you're still on line, would you please tell me why we use the simple past afer "how long" in the following text and the present perfect? Is it because we are talking about an event that is completed and has no relation with the present?

Anne : Tu es dÃ©jÃ allÃ© Ã Cardiff, n'est-ce pas?

You HAVE already BEEN to Cardiff, haven't you?

Peter: Oui, en fait je viens de rentrer.

Yes, I have. I HAVE actually just COME back.

Anne : Combien de temps y as-tu passÃ©? Qu'as-tu fait?

How long DID you STAY there? What DID you DO?

Peter: J'y suis restÃ© une semaine. J'ai rencontrÃ© des jeunes trÃ¨s

sympathiques et nous nous sommes bien amusÃ©s.

I stayed there for one / a week. I met (some ?) friendly / nice young people and we had great fun.

All the best,

Hela

"I am yet to see" versus "I have yet to see"

Bajaber — Thu, 30 Nov 2006 04:04:11 GMT

Hello All,

Hope you can help me out here. I have been using "I am yet to (followed by verb)" for a long time, since I learnt it in primary school I think. However, yesterday, there was an argument about the standard of English in my college. One of the participants pointed out that my statement,

"I am yet to see a thread in which the respondents used just proper English. It is about time we promote the usage of proper English."

was grammatically incorrect, and said it should read,

""I HAVE yet to see a thread in which the respondents used just proper English."

I, on the other hand, claimed that both are correct, as it is just a matter of preference. This is the explanation given by him,

Context:
First of all, there is always a reason to use certain words rather than others. Each word inflect upon different aspects of a sentence differently.

Anyway,

"I have yet to see"... the "have" and "yet" are the unique words that make up the sentence here. "Have" is used in the context with a present perfect tense. 'Present perfect' means 'any unfinished past or anything that has started but not ended'.

"I am yet to see"... the "am" and "yet" here is used for a future tense. 'Future tenses' refers to actions that have not started yet, or something that is to be done in the future.

Illustration:

I have yet to see a stupid person. (Translation: I have already begun searching for one, but until now, I have not seen one... yet).

I am yet to do my homework. (Translation: I have to do the homework, but have not started... yet).

Of coz, he claims this is the explanation he got from English teachers.

I was thinking, does this explanation mean that, the seeing of such threads has started but not finished? Ddoes his argument also mean that, "I have yet to go to England" imply that he has started going England, but not reached there?

Please share your thoughts

Re: has,had,have

Phuongninhbao — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:31:31 GMT

Modal verb: I have to study Grammar all the time.

Present perfect: I have been in Dalat for twenty years. She has been..........

Present perfect continuous: I have been eating She has been eating.

Causative: I have my car serviced

If -clause; If I have time, I'll go with you

If I had time , I would go with you

If I had gone by car, I would have saved time

Bare infinitive: Let's have a look about your translation

Infinitive: I try to have a good pronunciation

Imperative; Have a nice day

And a lot of kinds of sentences such as It's isn't necessary that she have a lot of advices to him,. you needn't have gone to the office yesterday.....

Phuong ninh

Re: Present perfect continuous in negative sentences

Mowgli — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 10:13:31 GMT

Hello,

excuse me. It shouhd have been: My grammar book says PRESENT PERFECT SIMPLE is usual with all verbs in negative sentences. I have written PP continuous which was an accident. I try to translate exactly what this book says (ItÂ´s a Czech book for language schools - AngliÄtina pro jazykovÃ© Å¡koly, II, s. 30, 1988, but there are also new editions):

The present perfect simple is usual with the verbs to be, to have to know and all verbs in negative sentences instead of the present perfect simple. explanation if you canÂ´t understand my translation: in the context where we usually use with other verbs the PPcontionuous (The PPsimple in negative sentences expresses that the acction hasnÂ´t occured at all.):

examples from the book for the verbs to have, to be and to know : "IÂ´ve known him for ten years. ItÂ´s been hot since Monday. IÂ´ve had this camera for more than a year"

and negative: "It hasnÂ´t rained since Monday. X affirmative: "It has been raining since Monday."

So, thatÂ´s why I suppose the following sentences should be wrong:

*** hasnÂ´t been raining since Monday.***

or the sentences from my previous post:

*** havenÂ´t been driving/smoking since 2000. ***???However, you have written: "These are OK, but would also be OK without the continuous".

I suppose the verbs which arenÂ´t usually used in the present continuos are also not used in the present perfect continous. So the list of the verbs {have, be, know} which are used in the the present perfect simple in the contexts where other verbs have present perfect continous isnÂ´t probably complete. (I mean not only: be, have and know. I would add other non progressive verbs / to hear, to see in the meaning of :with your eyes, to own and other)

I have a car now. (not *** I am having a car now.***)

so thatÂ´s why I say :

IÂ´ve had this camera for more than a year. and not: *** have been having this camera for more than a year.***

My example for the nonprogressive for the verb own: We have owned this house for ten years. (but: We have been rebuilding this house for ten years.) - both means to me: we still own the house, we are still rebuilding the house - own - nonprogressive verb

And now I am going to try how I understand the book of the Murphy (itÂ´s English Grammar in Use for Intermediate students, however, I donÂ´t have the book here and thatÂ´s why I cannot write it exactly, I am afraid. It concerns the verbs live and work:

It should be possible (according to Murphy) to use either PP simple or PP continuous in the same context with the verbs live and work:

An example from an other textbook (Enterprise III, Workbook, page 10, ex. 6, Express Publishing, 2000 (1997).

According to the key:

How long have you been working/worked there? (I suppose both means: You are still working/you still work there.)

One friend of mine says he knows the same rule for wait. So it should also be possible to say:

How long have you been waiting here/have yow waited here?

I have been waiting since eight oÂ´clock. / I have waited since eight oÂ´clock. - Is there any difference in meaning of those two sentences? (PPcontinous is probably more usual in this context - "since eight oÂ´clock", isnÂ´t it? - I would have said before: I have waited since eight oÂ´clock is wrong.- You have written : "ItÂ´s fine. In fact, since "wait" usually refers to a period of time, IÂ´d say continous is the more common form of the perfect tense of this verb. Does it (also) concern this special context, these two sentences, or is it probably meant in general?

(- You have also written: It is possible to use any verb in these two tenses. Does it also concern the non progressive verbs (have, be, know, own, see, hear, ...)? Can I also normally use them in the PP continuous? - for example: ???I have been having this camera for more than half a year.????

Thank you for your reply Mowgli

Re: present perfect vs simple past : conflicting criteria?

Jussive — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:59:34 GMT

IAmWithName2 wrote:

Hi all,

Just when I thought I understood (almost) everything there is to know about the present perfect and the simple past I stumbled over a translation from Dutch I made --the problematic sentence is bold:

----- begin fragment -----

Seventeen-year-old Claire lives on her own in a studio in the provincial town of AngoulÃªme, where she works as a cashier in a hypermarchÃ©. She spends her little spare time designing and embroidering clothing.

The flaming red-haired teenager has always had a troublesome relationship with her parents and ran away from home when she became pregnant. Claire works hard and has little contact with her colleagues. Accidentally, she comes into contact with Madame MÃ©likian, an older woman who has an embroidery studio where she makes dresses for top designers from Paris.

----- end fragment -----

Is the sentence "The flaming ... pregnant" correct? I first wanted to use the simple past for all the verbs, because of the Adverbial Phrase "when she became pregnant". But then I remembered that "always" is a marker for the present perfect. So that's why I have mixed tenses in my main clauses, which seems awkward. Can anyone shed some light on the grammar of this sentence?

Thanks a lot,

JJ S

The mixed tenses are ok as long she's had this troublesome relationship up to the present time. In other words, regardless of leaving home, she can still have a troublesome relationship with her parents if she still sees them, of course, but that depends on the story.

present perfect vs simple past : conflicting criteria?

IAmWithName2 — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:35:10 GMT

Hi all,

Just when I thought I understood (almost) everything there is to know about the present perfect and the simple past I stumbled over a translation from Dutch I made --the problematic sentence is bold:

----- begin fragment -----

Seventeen-year-old Claire lives on her own in a studio in the provincial town of AngoulÃªme, where she works as a cashier in a hypermarchÃ©. She spends her little spare time designing and embroidering clothing.

The flaming red-haired teenager has always had a troublesome relationship with her parents and ran away from home when she became pregnant. Claire works hard and has little contact with her colleagues. Accidentally, she comes into contact with Madame MÃ©likian, an older woman who has an embroidery studio where she makes dresses for top designers from Paris.

----- end fragment -----

Is the sentence "The flaming ... pregnant" correct? I first wanted to use the simple past for all the verbs, because of the Adverbial Phrase "when she became pregnant". But then I remembered that "always" is a marker for the present perfect. So that's why I have mixed tenses in my main clauses, which seems awkward. Can anyone shed some light on the grammar of this sentence?

Thanks a lot,

JJ S

Put the verb in brackets into a suitable active and passive verb form.

maxmouse — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 12:32:34 GMT

This is a serios problem for me. When we use active or passive ?

Dear Mrs Patel,
We are delighted to inform you that you 1 (select)for a free holiday. According to our information, you 2(answer) a telephone survey last month, as a result of which your name 3( enter)in the holiday draw.Now our computer 4(choose) your name, so you and your family5.(invite) to spend a week in a European destination of your choice.This offer 6(make) on the condition that you attend a special promotions day with other lucky families in your region who 7(offer) a similar deal.You 8.(ask) to attend on any Saturday next month at the Royal Hotel,Manchester.If you 9(interest) in attending and taking up this offer, please 10(detach) the slip below and return it to us as soon as possible.

In my opinion
1)have been selected - this is the example ( I can't understand why this is the correct form. Why not you are selected.
2) answered (because of last month )
3) has been entered ( present perfect beacuse it's a result of something and passive because we don't understand who entered this name.
4)First I thought that it must be past simple but I saw NOW and then decided that it should be has chosen
5)are invited (I decided to be in this way because of the translation which seems to be the very best way !
6)makes ( I think that it is active form because we know that the OFFER makes it not somebody else. and present simple because the other verb in the sentence ''Attend'' is also in present simple.After deep thinking I think that it can also be is made. It depends on the translation.
7)offers - active because we know who offers and the present simple because of that it is regular activity
8)are asked ( passive form because somebody who is not mentioned asked us and about present progressive because it is something already decided ''Saturday next month'' I think that ''are going to be asked'' is also possible but I am not sure. I'd be glad to understand if it is possible.
9)are interested - because interested is almost always used in passive and the transation clearly show us that it must be passive
10)detach - I am not sure about this but I think it is active ''it can not be passive'' and is present simple because of''return''
If somebody spots some mistakes let's show them to me please!