<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Search results for 'tag:Stative verbs tag:Colloquial expressions' matching tags 'Stative verbs' and 'Colloquial expressions'</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aStative+verbs+tag%3aColloquial+expressions</link><description>Search results for 'tag:Stative verbs tag:Colloquial expressions' matching tags 'Stative verbs' and 'Colloquial expressions'</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CSMOD (Build: 3256.36449)</generator><item><title>Re: I have vs I have been</title><link>http://www.englishforums.com/English/IHaveVsIHaveBeen/bcjnn/post.htm#96182</link><pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2005 22:34:26 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="true">946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:96182</guid><dc:creator>paco2004</dc:creator><description>Hello Roro&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Excellent writing! I believe you are an advanced English learner, at least a learner much more advanced than me. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Anyway, what I feel about the problem you have now is that it rather come from your misunderstanding the tense relation in a sentence using the time connective word . &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The usage of  is like this;&lt;br /&gt;[1] Event (=main clause : the verbal must have a continuity sense)  time-anchor noun phrase.&lt;br /&gt;       EX-1  (&lt;STRONG&gt;o&lt;/STRONG&gt;) We lived in Moscow until the spring of 1997.&lt;br /&gt;       EX-2  (&lt;STRONG&gt;o&lt;/STRONG&gt;) I'll wait you at the station until 6:00 PM.&lt;br /&gt;       EX-3  (&lt;STRONG&gt;o&lt;/STRONG&gt;) He didn't finish the work until 6:00 AM.&lt;br /&gt;       EX-4  (&lt;STRONG&gt;x&lt;/STRONG&gt;) He finished the work until 6:00 AM.&lt;br /&gt;Please note that  has not a continuity sense but  has a continuity sense.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Instead of nouns phrases, you can use a subordinate clause as the time anchor.&lt;br /&gt;[2] Main Event  Sub Event&lt;br /&gt;       EX-5  (&lt;STRONG&gt;o&lt;/STRONG&gt;) We had lived in Moscow until we moved to St. Petersburg.&lt;br /&gt;Please note  happened first and then  happened. This is why not  but  (a form for one-step backshifted than  in time sequence) is used here.&lt;br /&gt;EX-5 is the most correct as a formal English expression but native speakers often use  instead of  in their daily conversation. That is;&lt;br /&gt;       EX-5'  (&lt;STRONG&gt;o?&lt;/STRONG&gt;) We lived in Moscow until we moved to St. Petersburg.&lt;br /&gt;is acceptable as a colloquial expression. This is because one can easily understand Main Event should happen before Sub Event happens in the constructions using .&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In your sentence #1, you used  for Main Event and  for Sub Event. This is wrong because Main Event (=we be happy) should happen before Sub Event (=the loan trouble start). Because the Sub Event happens in the past and expressed in , you have to use either  (='we had been happy') or  (='we were happy').&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As for Q #2, you can say "He has been working for all the day long" if this sentence stands alone. (You could utter this when you want to the continuity of 'his' working.)  But you said "He is sleeping now" in the previous sentence.  I feel "He is sleeping now" and "He has been working for all the day long" contradict each other. I think usual people cannot sleep and work simultaneously at a time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As for Q #4, I suppose you would now understand why I said your sentence sounds odd. As you are saying,  can mean sometimes an experience in the past. &lt;br /&gt;    EX-6  I have seen him before = I saw him at least once before.&lt;br /&gt;But it depends on verbs. When you use  (='have + p.p.') for stative verbs like , it implies the 'continuity of the action up to now', not a past experience.&lt;br /&gt;    EX-7  I have stayed in New York before (?) =/= I once stayed in New York.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is my thought. But others (especially native speakers) may have another opinions. Please wait until they come to post here.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;paco&lt;br /&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>