|
 |
Present perfect /present perfect continou | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Questions About Your Target Languages |  | |
| Cavesa Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5007 days ago 3277 posts - 6779 votes  Speaks: Czech*, FrenchC2, EnglishC1 Studies: Spanish, German, Italian | Message 25 of 30 29 January 2014 at 6:03pm | IP Logged | ||
|
My point of view is based on lots of reading and listening and communication with the natives, on learning the british grammar and observing both as much as I can. But I am not a native speaker.
2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| patrickwilken Senior Member Germany radiant-flux.net Joined 4531 days ago 1546 posts - 3200 votes Studies: German | Message 26 of 30 29 January 2014 at 6:56pm | IP Logged | ||
|
What about something more topical at least for me:
1. It has snowed in Berlin for a long time. 2. It has been snowing in Berlin for a long time. The first suggests that it snows regularly in Berlin, and that this was (perhaps) different at some previous time. Perhaps snow is now a regular occurrence in winter. The second could be interpreted in the same way as the first, but perhaps more naturally to mean that it is currently snowing, and it has been snowing continuously for a long time. Edited by patrickwilken on 29 January 2014 at 6:56pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| ScottScheule Diglot Senior Member United States scheule.blogspot.com Joined 5226 days ago 645 posts - 1176 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish Studies: Latin, Hungarian, Biblical Hebrew, Old English, Russian, Swedish, German, Italian, French | Message 27 of 30 29 January 2014 at 7:01pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Patrick,
I agree almost entirely. I would only quibble with "more naturally," since both meanings of the second sentence seem natural to me, depending on context. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| patrickwilken Senior Member Germany radiant-flux.net Joined 4531 days ago 1546 posts - 3200 votes Studies: German | Message 28 of 30 29 January 2014 at 7:12pm | IP Logged | ||
I think if it's a question of emphasis. If I wanted to imply the first meaning, I would use the first phrasing myself. If I wanted to emphasize the continuous and current nature of the snow I would use the second wording. But I am sure what appears natural depends a lot on what usage you have been exposed to. I think the "has snowed" implies an event that is temporally self-contained, and the "for a long time" suggests that this event has occurred multiple times over a long time period; whereas "has been snowing" doesn't have that self-contained implication temporally (i.e., it could continue to snow without end), and the "for a long time" is directed at this single event. So not only does "has snowed" vs "has been snowing" have different meanings, but these phrases change the implications/meaning of "for a long time" in their respective sentences. Edited by patrickwilken on 29 January 2014 at 7:30pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| tastyonions Triglot Senior Member United States goo.gl/UIdChYRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4663 days ago 1044 posts - 1823 votes Speaks: English*, French, Spanish Studies: Italian | Message 29 of 30 30 January 2014 at 10:28am | IP Logged | ||
|
One strange thing is that the sentence "I have worked in London for a long time" sounds significantly better to me if I append the word "now": "I have worked in London for a long time now."
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| patrickwilken Senior Member Germany radiant-flux.net Joined 4531 days ago 1546 posts - 3200 votes Studies: German | Message 30 of 30 30 January 2014 at 1:03pm | IP Logged | ||
The difference between "had worked" and "has been working" constructions is that the first emphasizes time, and the second the process - so 'now' reemphasizes and fits with the temporal aspect. You can see this more clearly in the negations: 1. It has NOT snowed in Berlin for a long time. (TIME emphasized) 2. It has NOT been snowing in Berlin for a long time. (SNOWING emphasized) OR 1. He has NOT worked in London for a long time. (TIME emphasized) 2. He has NOT been working in London for a long time. (WORK emphasized) Number 1, suggests he used to work in London, but hasn't for a long time. The "not" negates "worked". Number 2, is a bit more ambiguous, but I would generally read it as having the opposite meaning, that he has only recently started working in London. Here the "not" negates the temporal aspect of the working (i.e., the "long time"), and so implies he has only worked a "short time". Edited by patrickwilken on 30 January 2014 at 1:13pm 1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
