+0
I have some troubles with this tense . I cannot understand clearly when we use present perfect and when we use passive voice .

for example :

When happened to it?

1 / It has been eaten .

2 / It is eaten .

That are the differences between those 2 sentences ? Can you explain it to me please .

Thank you !
1 2
Comments  
Tense and voice are two different things.
Both of your examples are in passive voice, especially if you flesh out the sentences a bit more.

Pasta has been eaten by Italians for centuries. (From a long time ago until the present moment.)
Pasta is eaten daily by Italians. (As a present-day habit.)

The span of time encompassed by the first sentence (with the present perfect) is much greater than the span of time encompassed by the second sentence, because the present perfect includes a reference to the past within it.

CJ
1.Pasta is eaten daily by Italians. (As a present-day habit.)

2.Italians eat pasta. [ This too is a presen-dat habit.]

What is the difference between the two sentences? I guess the first sentence is a passive sentence and the second one is an active sentence. I maybe wrong. Please tell me.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
You are right Rotter. The second sentence is an active sentence.and the first is passive. We always confuse the complex tense. You should pay attention to the verb. Passive : Be + Past Participle such as" is eaten. " Present perfect : Have+ past participle. For example: I've just read your post . However, I think" I've just recognized your look "is not the same meaning , we should use past tense. Present perfect in this sentence seems to .describe an another meaning . Could someone explain this meaning? Thanks in advance.

Phuong Ninh
Rotter1.Pasta is eaten daily by Italians. (As a present-day habit.)

2.Italians eat pasta. [ This too is a presen-dat habit.]

What is the difference between the two sentences? I guess the first sentence is a passive sentence and the second one is an active sentence. I maybe wrong. Please tell me.

They have basically the same meaning. The difference is that, in the first sentence, the focus is on "pasta"; you're talking about pasta. It couls belong to a speech about "pasta through the centuries".

In the second one, the focus is on "Italians"; you're talking about the Italians and their habits.
NickyjanI have some troubles with this tense . I cannot understand clearly when we use present perfect and when we use passive voice .

for example :

When happened to it?

1 / It has been eaten .

2 / It is eaten .

That are the differences between those 2 sentences ? Can you explain it to me please .

Thank you !

To use present perfect, the event described must happen sometime in the past and continue to present. EX: I have lived in the same house since I was 5 years old.

She has taken French for 5 years ( note- not 5 years ago)

To use present tense, the condition or action is routine and regular.

Ex: John takes the bus to work everyday.

Maggie comes home from work around 5

Mary pays her rent on time every month.

When a sentence is written in passive voice, the object is the focal point and the receiver of the action.

Ex: The robber was chased and caught by the police. –Passive voice focus is on the robber

The police chased and caught the robberActive – focus is on the police.

During the chase, the robber was warned by the police to give up.- Passive voice focus is on

the robber.

During the chase, the police warned the robber to give up - Active – focus is on the police



Paper and gun powder were invented by the Chinese hundreds of years ago- focus on paper and gun

Powder.

The Chinese had invented paper and gun powder hundreds of years ago. – focus on Chinese.

Hope these examples help…

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
I think in written language people tend to write the passive form.

1. Foreign newspapers are sold here.

2. We sell foreing newspapers here. [ This is not standard.]

The reason, I beleive, is that the passive form emphasize the facts whereas the active form is the mere facts.

Am I right here?
RotterI think in written language people tend to write the passive form.
1. Foreign newspapers are sold here.
2. We sell foreing newspapers here. [ This is not standard.]
The reason, I beleive, is that the passive form emphasize the facts whereas the active form is the mere facts.
Am I right here?
Hello Rotter

What is the difference between "the fact" and "the mere fact", may I ask you?

By the way we discussed quite recently on why and when passive voice is used. Please visit What do you think of 'passive voice'?

paco
I have learnt to write the words 'mere facts' , 'mere thoughts' , etc. I believe people write this way to emphasize the facts.

1. I like girls.

2. I do like girls. [ I mean what I am saying.]
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more