Search results for 'tag:Present progressive tag:Conversations' matching tags 'Present progressive' and 'Conversations'

Re: What is the difference? Present Progressive VS Present Perfect Progressive.

CalifJim — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:08:55 GMT

She is eating dinner for one hour. / She has been eating dinner for one hour.

He is watching TV all day. / He has been watching TV all day.

It is raining outside. / It has been raining outside.

What are you talking about? / What have you been talking about?

You can't specify a period of time (as shown above in red) with the present progressive. You can with the present perfect progressive. So two of your eight examples are incorrect grammatically.

Other than that, the difference is the time at which the action occurs.

The present progressive says the action is occurring at the time you say the sentence. For example, suppose it is now 6 o'clock, and you say:

She is eating dinner. (Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that she is eating dinner.)

It is raining. (Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that it is raining.)

The present perfect progressive says the action started happening before the time you say the sentence and continues up to the time of your saying it. Maybe the action stops just before you say the sentence and maybe the action continues as you say the sentence, or even continues after you say the sentence, but the main idea is that it starts before you say the sentence. Again, suppose it is 6 o'clock.

He has been watching TV. (Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that he has been watching TV from 3 o'clock until now. - or from 1 o'clock until now - or from 2:30 until now. -- The amount of time is not specified.)

He has been watching TV for two hours. ( Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that he has been watching TV from 4 o'clock until now. -- The amount of time is specified in this case.)

It has been raining. (Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that it has been raining from 3 o'clock until now. - or from 1 o'clock until now - or from 2:30 until now. -- The amount of time is not specified.)

It has been raining for a half hour. ( Now, as I speak, at 6 o'clock, I see that it has been raining from 5:30 until now. -- The amount of time is specified in this case.)

What have you been talking about? (Now, as I ask, at 6 o'clock, I ask the topic(s) of conversation during previous time up to the moment I ask.)

_________

Another way the present perfect progressive can work, if no amount of time is specified, is that the action occurred in the past and continued for some time and then stopped, but there is evidence at the time of speaking that the action did occur.

It has been raining, but it is not raining now. (I know because I can see now that the streets are wet.)

The children have been playing ball in the family room, but they are not playing ball there now. (I know because the ball is there, and it should be in the garage. I know because there is a mark on the wall where the ball probably hit the wall. I know because I can see the lamp overturned and broken on the floor.)

This last pattern often occurs with must to show that the speaker has reached a logical conclusion from the evidence before him.

It must have been raining, because the streets are wet.

The children must have been playing ball in the family room, because the lamp is broken.

Re: simple present and simple progressive tenses

Goodman — Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:46:01 GMT

Hi Dax,

I just want to clarify something about present progressive. If we are engaged in a conversation and you and I are having a cup of tea, then "are having" refers to now.

If I ask you " what are you doing this weekend?", I am asking you "do you have any plan this weekend" or "what will you be doing this weekend". So present progressive has a unquie property which can be used at the present and a defined future time.

Re: Past Perfect

just the truth — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:26:51 GMT

Paco:
By the way I have a feeling that English 'now' (in the linguistic sense, not in the physical sense) is not instantaneous, but it seems to occupy some span in the time that flows from the past to the future. Otherwise I cannot understand the usage of the present progressive tense.

JTT: I didn't make any reference to 'now' and the present progressive, Paco. Different 'tense', different usage. The present progressive encompasses a different part of the time spectrum than does a future marker. In order to discuss anything that is going to happen ahead of 'now', no matter how small that time frame is, requires a future marker.

Bringing this discussion back to the issue at hand, Pastel and I would guess, a large number of ESLs are operating under the mistaken notion that, "I would save $20" has a past time meaning and that it can collocate with "if I hadn't bought. We now can see it doesn't and that it can't. We should also be able to see that word choice also has a dramatic effect on what "tense" is chosen.

I believe this aspect is a crucial to helping Jack and other ESLs really grasp these differences. For as long as I've been here, Jack has been confused by these "tense" differences.

Why can't 'save' be used without a modal perfect, but these two are okay,

a) I would have 20 bucks more NOW if I hadn't bought it.

b) I would be ahead 20 bucks NOW if I hadn't bought it.

Because a) and b) have meanings that point to a present state, a present condition while 'save' has a meaning that can only point to that finished time when something was bought.

Let me repeat what the Longman Grammar of Written and Spoken English states as regards the modal verbs in modern English. This is crucial to Jack and Pastel and many other ESLs grasping the meanings of these sentences. They have been misled for much too long.

++++++++++++
"As already noted (6.2.1), English verbs phrases can be marked for either tense or modality, but not both."

" ... we regard modal verbs as unmarked for tense."

Longman Grammar of Written and Spoken English [LGWSE]
++++++++++++++

Here is what is on the back cover of the LGWSE.

"Some aspects of traditional grammar are challenged by this book, and some findings, not even suspected before now, will surprise and interest the reader.

The way language is used in conversation is quite different from the way language is used in fiction, which in turn is very different from the grammatical characteristics of newspapers or academic books."

David Crystal - "For the foreseeable future anyone with a serious interest in English grammar will have to take into account the information this book contains."

Re: Why would

abbie1948 — Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:39:48 GMT

We would never say "Why will you want to do that." It does not make sense in English.

If we are questioning someone's definite plans for the future, we would say "Why DO you want to do that?" We use the present simple for the QUESTION because, although the plans are made, the person is thinking / talking about it NOW.

In effect the conversation is held in 2 different tenses.

"I am going to go to the cinema tomorrow" (present progressive used to talk about a plan which has already been made. I AM going to the cinema - it's definite)

"Why do you want to do that?" (present simple)

"Why would you want to do that" - this is used only informally, because it could sound as though you disagree with the person speaking. . (Why would you want to do that, I can think of something better you can do)

"Would" is used when we are talking about a future plan or idea which is NOT DEFINITE.

"I would like to buy a new car" (I'd like to, but I might not be able to afford it)

The correct question is "Would you?" This is a polite enquiry.

Why would you want to do that if you hair looks nice already? (If this is correct, why?)

We would say:

"Why would you want to do that? Your hair looks nice already" You don't need to say "if", because you are expressing an opinion. You think their hair looks nice.

This is a good example of "Why would you want to do that?" expressing disagreement. Your friend has said they want to dye their hair. Obviously they don't think it looks nice; you do - so you are disagreeing with them.

"...if you hair looked nice already? " - you are using the past tense and the future together here, and that's why it sounds odd. You need the present tense, Wyour hair looks nice"

And no.6 just isn't right for all the reasons mentioned above.

By the way, can you please tell me how you can write in bold, and underline when posting? I can't seem to do it. Thanks