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

Introduction:tense correction

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 05:35:08 GMT

Hi, Please correct this. I am particularly troubled by the choice of using the present and present perfect tenses in situations like this. Please tell me why you would use the past, rather than the present perfect.

Brief biography:

John Doe has graduated (graduated??) from *** University in the U.S. with the Bachelor of Art degree in honors, and a Master of Art degree from the same institution. Before coming to ***, he has worked (worked??) as site coordinator for international conferences as a government employee in ***. Prior to that, he was involved in teaching science in many high schools in the U.S. HIs current hobbies include cooking and jogging with his three-old Chihuhua, which he bought when he was entralled by the grand, loud sounds it makes when it beseeches for good dog food.

Also, I am somewhat lost as to what is the guideline on using just the adjective to denote a noun that has the definte article 'the' in front of it, like the below. I think I have seen more than enough adjectives being used to refer to nouns that are preceded by words like 'best', 'expensive', 'good', etc. I understand you can write 'the best' to denote 'the best people'.

John Doe purchased the most expensive pizza in town for *** dollars. He remind us that when you want the best and the expensive, you must shell out the money or you won't able to taste the quality the best and expensive have to offer.

Present perfect/simple past in since clause

Viceidol — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:17:59 GMT

Hello, everyone:

I've asked a question in http://www.englishforums.com/English/QuestionAboutTenseUsageSinceClause/gwxpb/post.htm , but I find out there are more than I need to ask, so I think it would be better to write a new post.

Recently I saw several sentences using simple past and present perefect in their since clauses. They are really confusing to me. I really hope you could help me comfirm their meaning. It may be very easy for you, but I've been wondering what their real meanings are for many days and couldn't find a clue. Please take a look at the following sentences:

1. It's a long time since he has lived there.

2. It's a long time since he lived there.

3. It is already 6 years since he have lived in New York.

4. It is already 6 years since he lived in New York.

I think those four sentences suggest "He doesn't live here/in New York now.", right? If my understanding is true, then please see the next pairs of sentences:

5. She has written to me frequently since I have been ill. (Does it suggest "I am still ill now"? If not, what does it suggest?)

6. She has written to me frequently since I was ill. (Does it suggest "I am not ill now."? If not, what does it suggest?)

If my understandings about sentence 5, 6 are right, then I think that's very tricky. Because sentence 1 and 3, which also use "have done" in their since clauses, suggest the same as sentence 2 and 4, which use simple past in their since clauses. However, although sentence 5 also uses "have done" in its since clause like sentence 1 and 3 do, sentence 5 does not suggest the same thing as sentence 6 does. Why is that? Is it because sentence 1, 2, 3, 4 use "It is + a period of time" structure? If so, I would be very amazed that simply a minor change like this would completely change the meaning of "have done" in the since clause. What do you think?

Here are some similar pairs of sentences:

7. Since she has been at Beijing University, it has gone through great changes. (I think it suggests "She is still at Beijing University now", am I right? If not, what does it suggest?)

8. Since she was at Beijing University, it has gone through great changes. (I think it suggests "She is not at Beijing University now", am I right? If not, what does it suggest?)

9. It's already 5 years since he has been in the army.

10. It's already 5 years since he was in the army.

I think sentence 9 and 10 both suggest "He is not in the army now", am I right? (Because "It is + a period of time" structure is used in the main clauses.) If not, what does it suggest?

11. They have been happy since they have lived in London. (I think it suggests "They still lives in London now", am I right? If not, what does it suggest?)

12. They have been happy since they lived in London. (I think it suggests "They don't live in London now", am I right? If not, what does it suggest?)

13. It's a long time since they have lived in London.

14. It's a long time since they lived in London.

I think sentence 13 and 14 both suggest "They don't live in London now", am I right? (Because "It is + a period of time" structure is used in the main clauses.) If not, what does it suggest?

I know those questions might be a piece of cake for native speakers, but they're totally confusing to me. I've searched all my grammar books for the answer but couldn't find one. I would appreciate it if you could help me solve my doubt. Thank you for reading this post!!

Re: tense - presenting a person

Mister Micawber — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 04:39:16 GMT

.
He graduated from *** University... -- the action is complete and in the past.

...and worked/has worked for the *** Company for ten years. -- Either is possible; use the present perfect if he is still working for the *** Company.
.

Re: all the general forms of English tenses >> pleas help me.

Anonymous — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:26:39 GMT

The layout is good but The Passive voice is not used with the Future continuous,Present perfect continuous, Past perfect continuous and the Future perfect continuous!!

I have been teaching for 12 years at university.

Re: Help with Cover Letter Letter pls

Mister Micawber — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:17:40 GMT

.
I have underlined some problem areas. One point-- usually, you should use simple past tense where you have used present perfect:

Motivation Letter:

The Graduate programme in Finance at Hampton College is according my target to develop my skills on the financial field for a knowledge improvement and a career progression on the financial industry. Regarding the excellent reputation of Hampton College in specific, the Department of Economics, and its international recognized researches, I have chosen Hampton to study. Furthermore, I also plan to do the Master in Finance at Hampton, after finishing the graduate finance program.

I have a work experience in La Caja, one of the biggest spanishes bank in assets, working in an external commission auditing loans contracts and reporting directly for the Spanish Central Bank and the National Treasury. After that, I have finished my degree and I came to London to improve my English skills when I have started to work in a International Company of Fundsâ Transfers, liasing with more than 240 banks around the world, processing and confirming multi FX settlements, treasury, daily reconcialitions and cheque risk administrations. Starting as sales executive and finishing as a manager in the central branch of the company.

Aside my working experience, I also have knowledge in stock market, being a keen awareness of world events, current affair and financial markets. My interest in those subjects have started after I made a course~~, during my degree,~~ in financial markets and technical chart analysis, and I have started to invest on the Madrid Stock Exchange using an online stockbroker platform.

I have studied the elementary and high school in a top school in Madrid, Montfort School, which allowed me to enter in a top 5 university in Madrid, Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Where I have studied Business Administration, what the equivalent in UK would be a Bachelor Hons Degree in Science in Business Administration. Which includes, statistics, finance, accounting, marketing, economics, administration, human resource and strategy planning.

Thus, I am very motivated in improve my mathematical skills and my technical knowledge in finance with Hampton College.

Your sincerely,

Anderson

Please help me here

Kins_10 — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:32:03 GMT

Dr Jemilah graduated from Malaysia National University (MNU) with a Master's degree in Obstetrics. She became a lecturer at MNU in 1995. Her first mission was to help war victims in Kosovo. During the war, She, along with her team, helped to rebuild to two hospitals. The volunteers delivered medicines and equipment. They also treated many sick and injured people. Dr Jemilah was not discouraged and continued with her work. She said that she was willing to help the people of Kosovo.

Dr Jemilah has received world recognition for her noble work. In 2003, she was honoured with the 'East Asia Women's Award for Peace'. She is currently in private practice.

My questions are as follow.

1. Dr Jemilah has been a lecturer at MNU since 1995? Is the statement false? She became a lecturer at MNU in 1995.

2. Why the present perfect tense is used here;Dr Jemilah has received world recognition for her noble work.

3. Why there is no article before the private practice? She is currently in #private practice.

Re: since, ago

Anonymous — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:00:08 GMT

Hoa Thai wrote:

Hi Goodman,

Maybe I should not touch your nerve again - You are so expressive and I am scared! (for your heart and for my embarrassment). Don't worry, I am all barks and I no bite!

However, I must present my thought to find out what is wrong with it. Here I come.

I havenât been myself since yesterday. Yesterday marks a complete past. I am fine with this
I havenât been myself since I met you. Met marks a complete past. Ditto!

Today is 11/22/2007. Two days ago means 11/20/2007, which marks a complete past. Thus, âI havenât been myself since 11/20/2007â is the same as âI havenât been myself since two days ago.â

Others may feel ok with this but it hurts my ears and probably hurts the earsof the teacher who taught me how to use proper English. She was invited to BeiJing University to teach English in the 80's. When her 5 years contract was finished, she came back to the state and was teaching in the ESL class I was in. If not for her, I most likely won't be able to rub elbows with the English experts here. Well, she was the one that taught me never to mix ago in present perfect situations. For your sentense, I would say "I haven't been myself for the last/ past two days".

That is where my brain becomes confused with your reasoning.

Now regarding your comment about native people might not be better than non-natives in using good English â I understand why you said that: the seemingly biased view causes pain to people who do not belong to the regarded circle. However, we must accept the fact that âperfection is the result of constant use.â (Of course, constantly use in a wrong way will form a bad habit). When ESL learners come to forums like this, with fresh learning, they want a confirmation of people who they trust to take them to the next plateau of knowledge; and they rely on native, know-best, English teachers. I am one of them! (not the teacher, but the learner - mind you) You are overly humble!. It is up to each learner to ask, validate, and ask again. Knowledge seekers are smart people, they will form their own opinion about a forum debate. My goodness! you read my mind. Finally, someone shares my light! And if a non-native English speaker like you can regularly give the information seekers sensible GOOD ENGLISH answers, I think you would establish a good image for yourself. I am not sure what to make of your last comments. But I can tell you this, establishing a good image for myself on this forum is probably "mission impossible" because the image I have created here is one that gets the darts thrown at it! The truth is, I am not the kind who relies on books but rather the kind who learn through media and interacting with others. I am still learning, refining and polishing my English. I make many mistakes and I am not shy saying it because I recognize mistakes allow me to see where I need to improve and remember not to repeat them.

Here is what Edward D Goodman, an excellent writer, editor, and a scholar in my eye, writes, â â¦ good English is a kind of snobbery, It is not standard English but the English of a minority who are likely to consider themselves superior, and are also likely to be considered superior by others. English that is good enough in one context may not be good enough in another, and thus good English amounts to savor faire, a touchstone of the snob. All of us fail to use it occasionally, and some of us fail to use it frequently. Those who fail infrequently look down on those who fail frequently; those who fail frequently either live in constant fear of embarrassing themselves or find some way of taking pride in their unvarnished expression. Those who fail infrequently make further distinctions among themselves; the famous grammarian H.W.Fowler observed, âAlmost every man is potentially a purist and a sloven at once to persons looking at him from a lower and a higher position â¦. than his own.ââ I don't quite grasp what is in his mind - but I sure want to climb the knowledge hill and find the pleasure in use the language,

I am still wondering why Clive though Anon was me! I take that as a complement for a uniqueness of my writing style, which I donât even know I have one.

Best to all,
Hoa Thai

Hi Hao,

Thank you for your post.

Maybe I should not touch your nerve again - I hope you are being humorous and not sarcastic You are so expressive and I am scared! (for your heart and for my embarrassment). Don't worry, I am all barks and no bite!

However, I must present my thought to find out what is wrong with it. Here I come.

I havenât been myself since yesterday. Yesterday marks a complete past. I am fine with this
I havenât been myself since I met you. Met marks a complete past. Ditto!

Today is 11/22/2007. Two days ago means 11/20/2007, which marks a complete past. Thus, âI havenât been myself since 11/20/2007â is the same as âI havenât been myself since two days ago.â

Others may feel ok with the use of "ago with present perfect, but it hurts my ears and probably hurts the ears of the teacher who taught me how to use proper English 20 plus years ago. She was invited to BeiJing University to teach English in the 80's. Many of her graduate students ended up in goverment assigments working as translators and interpretors in the U.N. When her 5 years contract was finished, she came back to the state and was teaching in the ESL class I was in. If not for her, I most likely won't be able to rub elbows with the English experts here. Well, she was the one that taught me never to mix ago in present perfect situations. For your sentense, I would say "I haven't been myself for the last/ past two days".

That is where my brain becomes confused with your reasoning.

Now regarding your comment about native people might not be better than non-natives in using good English â I understand why you said that: the seemingly biased view causes pain to people who do not belong to the regarded circle. However, we must accept the fact that âperfection is the result of constant use.â I couldn't have agreed more (Of course, constantly use in a wrong way will form a bad habit). When ESL learners come to forums like this, with fresh learning, they want a confirmation of people who they trust to take them to the next plateau of knowledge; and they rely on native, know-best, English teachers. I am one of them! (not the teacher, but the learner - mind you) You are overly humble!. It is up to each learner to ask, validate, and ask again. Knowledge seekers are smart people, they will form their own opinion about a forum debate. My goodness! you read my mind. Finally, someone shares my light! And if a non-native English speaker like you can regularly give the information seekers sensible GOOD ENGLISH answers, I think you would establish a good image for yourself. I am not sure what to make of your last comments. But I can tell you this, establishing a good image for myself on this forum is probably "mission impossible" because the image I have created here is one that gets the darts thrown at it! The truth is, I am not the kind who relies on books but rather the kind who learn through media and interacting with others. I am still learning, refining and polishing my English. I make many mistakes and I am not shy saying it because I recognize mistakes allow me to see where I need to improve and remember not to repeat them.

Here is what Edward D Goodman, an excellent writer, editor, and a scholar in my eye, writes, â â¦ good English is a kind of snobbery, It is not standard English but the English of a minority who are likely to consider themselves superior, and are also likely to be considered superior by others. English that is good enough in one context may not be good enough in another, and thus good English amounts to savor faire, a touchstone of the snob. All of us fail to use it occasionally, and some of us fail to use it frequently. Those who fail infrequently look down on those who fail frequently; those who fail frequently either live in constant fear of embarrassing themselves or find some way of taking pride in their unvarnished expression. Those who fail infrequently make further distinctions among themselves; the famous grammarian H.W.Fowler observed, âAlmost every man is potentially a purist and a sloven at once to persons looking at him from a lower and a higher position â¦. than his own.ââ I don't quite grasp what is in his mind - but I sure want to climb the knowledge hill and find the pleasure in use the language,

I am still wondering why Clive though Anon was me! I take that as a complement for a uniqueness of my writing style, which I donât even know I have one.

Re: inclusion vs. separation (present perfect and simple past)

Ant_222 — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:51:41 GMT

Hello, Hoa Thai.

Although Goodman outstripped me and deserved the brave one's laurels, I'd like to add some of the comments which I had started typing yesterday in the university, but hadn't time to finish...

Your reasonong is interesting but not fault-less.

«As CalifJim clearly explains in one of his writings, simple past represents time specificity; while present perfect serves time non-specificity (i.e., sometime in the past, including the recent time frame). Obviously, âspecificâ and ânon-specificâ cannot be the same.»

There's more to these tenses than this specifity/non-specifity dichotomy. I really prefer to do use actuality (connection of the action, or of a result there of, to the present) as the main (but not the only) difference.

This famous rule requireing Past Simple when a time is declared follows from it, because declaration of time indicates the speaker's focus on time rather than result.

«However, in terms of time, a ânon-specific time setâ does (Ant: I'd say "may include") include a âspecific time elementâ»

Don't get you.
1. In 1999 (is it specific?)
2. Since last month (specific?)
Which includes which?

«In addition to that, we all know a ânon-specific recent pastâ does not include a âspecific far pastâ â distinctively, the former is younger than the later.»

Is the word "far" so important?

1. We have been friends since 1995
2. I found it two minutes ago.

«In comparing to âthe lastâ - âthe bestâ or âthe worstâ is quality-based and time-unbiased â none or more are before it and none or more are after it;»

But only the word "last" deals with time. Is that an important difference?

«However, the superlative âtheâ does indicate a uniqueness, so when it happens, the time involved is specific!»

Yes!

I had started commenting this paragraph but suddenly found that your following paragraph tells the same:

«âWhat was the best movie you have ever seen?â means âAmong all movies you have seen, which one was the best?â - and that must be logical and natural since âall movies you have seenâ covers the time you saw the first one to the time you saw the last one (time non-specific) and âthe bestâ associates with one point in time (time specific). Time inclusion is in play.»

Fully agree, but asking "which one is the best" is also OK, and then it's not an inclusion...

«Can we interpret âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â to mean âAmong all movies you have seen, which one was the last?â»

From the standpoint of formal logic, yes. I don't completely understand Goodman's opinion that "among" may allow for several alternatives. There can be only one last movie (unless one's watching several movies simultaneously...)

If not, would âWhat was the last movie you have ever seen?â (âeverâ is added) allow us to carry out the similar interpretation?»

Well, as Goodman already said, "ever" doesn't work here. But it would work with "the best", "the most scary", e.t.c. Again, I don't understand Goodman's comment: «"Last" is an adjective, but not a comparative adjective» â they all are superlative adjectives, aren't they?

âWhat was the last movie you have seen?â

Using your logic, it does seem correct, but somehow I can't accept it. The very structure of this sentence with Past Simple in the main clause somehow forces a conflict with the Present Present in the subordinate clause.

The "was" in the main clause imposes a past time frame onto everything subordinated to it.

-----------------------------------------------------------

«As you might have noticed, even a reputable site like BBCâs teaching English, which I cited earlier in our previous thread, posed the question in a different way: âThink of a film you have seen recently, what was it called?â»

It's a pretty good sentence. They probably want the reader to focus on his/her impressions of the movie and they use Past Simple to help him/her "travel" back in time! It's neither bad nor an exception. I'll even say it's a nice example of your term "inclusion".

I wound't like "... what is it called" at all in this case!

Re: simple past vs present perfect

CalifJim — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:28:18 GMT

... ~~her~~ his help.

<<Are the books we ordered/have ordered used by any other university here?

Simple past or present perfect or both with different meanings?

It seems to me that discourse grammar forces the use of "have ordered" because the question is in the present and the following phrase "we have ordered" that describes the books should be in the present too. No, not necessarily; the verb order is in a subordinate clause describing the books. The use of the books by other universities can be a present state of affairs even though the books were ordered years ago.

Compare: The people we met last week are now waiting in the lobby of the hotel. >>

To my ear the present perfect is actually somewhat anomalous here (though not entirely wrong). If "we" ordered the books, we know when we ordered them. The ordering took place at a specific and known time. These factors argue for the use of the simple past. There would be nothing inconsistent in the meaning if we added a time reference, thus: Are the books we ordered last [week / month / year] used by any other university here? There is no question here -- no doubt -- about the fact of the ordering of the books.

But if there were some doubt about whether the books had been ordered, the present perfect, which is indefinite about time, might be more appropriate: Have you ordered the books yet? Yes, and the books we have ordered will be delivered to us by the end of the week. The underlined portions remain indefinite about the time of the ordering because the main point here is to find out (or to confirm, in the answer) that the event has taken place, not when.

CJ

Re: simple past vs present perfect

Magic79 — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:27:22 GMT

Cali has always given lucid explanations and I am very indebted to her help.

I have a question here not so much about sentence level but about discourse level.

First, look at this sentence:

Are the books we ordered/have ordered used by any other university here?

Simple past or present perfect or both with different meanings?

I asked an American teacher and he chose the simple past "we ordered."

It also seems to me as if both tenses work here. Any explanation?