Are both of these sentences correct?

Question

1) 5 minutes ago we were talking about you.2) 5 miutes ago we talked about you.If so, any difference in the meaning?

GPY · Accepted Answer

They are both correct English, apart from the typo, but (1) seems more natural. This seems quite a subtle point, possibly related to the duration of conversation relative to the time elapsed since it happened; thus, "Last night we talked about you" sounds OK, but "Five minutes ago we talked about you" seems rather unlikely to me.

"Five minutes ago we were talking about you" seems to be addressing the question "What were we doing five minutes ago?". If the information you want to focus on is that you were talking about the other person, say "We were talking about you five minutes ago" (or "We were talking about you a few minutes ago" if it is not necessary to be so precise).

In careful writing, it is good style to write out small numbers in words (with some exceptions, e.g. with abbreviated units, or in mathematical or scientific writing).

Voytaszek · Answer

And what if someone enters our converation and ask us about a topic we are discussing and we talked about this person.

Can we say...

We were talking about you.

without a time reference?

Does it have any matter for the grammar if this person were present when we were talking about them or just came and joined us?

GPY · Answer

VoytaszekCan we say... We were talking about you. without a time reference?

Yes. If someone has just joined you, it would normally be understood to mean "We were talking about you just now, just before (or as) you arrived".

VoytaszekDoes it have any matter for the grammar if this person were present when we were talking about them or just came and joined us?

If this person was present then normally they would already know what you were talking about, so it would not be necessary to say it. However, it is possible to say "We were talking about you" to someone already present if you were talking without mentioning a name or saying "you", and the other person did not realise who was being referred to.

CalifJim · Answer

VoytaszekCan we say...We were talking about you.without a time reference?

Yes, you can.

VoytaszekDoes it have any matter for the grammar if this person were present when we were talking about them or just came and joined us? Does it [matter / make any difference] if this person was present when we were talking about them or if they just joined us?

What need is there to tell someone that you were talking about them if they were present during the time you talked about them? Regardless, the grammar is the same.

CJ

Voytaszek · Answer

What about these sentences;

1. Today we have talked about you.
2. Today we have been talking about you.
3. Today we were talking about you.

?

CalifJim · Answer

VoytaszekWhat about these sentences;1. Today we have talked about you.2. Today we have been talking about you.3. Today we were talking about you.?

They all follow the rules of grammar, but none of them are really natural. In English the more natural word order is with the time at the end. Let's fix that first.

1. We have talked about you today.
2. We have been talking about you today.
3. We were talking about you today.

These are all grammatical, but the least natural (idiomatic) one is 1, and the most natural one is 3 (in my opinion).

CJ

Voytaszek · Answer

1. Today we have talked about you.
2. Today we have been talking about you.
3. Today we were talking about you.

So, could someone point out the differences in the meaning between these sentences? I know that they must be slight but I`m very curious about this and I think that knowing this will definitely improve my knowledge of the English grammar.

CalifJim · Answer

1. We have talked about you today.
2. We have been talking about you today.
3. We were talking about you today.

Time > > > > > > >
X = Now. The moment we say the sentence.

1. .......... [have talked] ................................... X
2. ...........[ - - - - have - - been - - talking - - - - X]
3. . [ - - - were - - talking - - - ] ........................ X

Of the three, the first is not very useful.

In 1, we conceptualize the talking as a single block of time condensed into a point in time. We make all the talking seem like a single event. The event of talking occurred.
In 2, we conceptualize the talking as an activity that began at some unspecified time in the past and continued over some period of time up to, and perhaps including, the present moment.
In 3, we conceptualize the talking as an activity that began at some unspecified time in the past and continued over some indefinite period of time and ended at some unspecified time in the past. Unlike in 2, the activity of talking does not continue up to the present moment.

Now you should be able to understand at least the difference between these:

It was raining. / I has been raining.
We were playing chess. / We have been playing chess.
They were walking in the garden. / They have been walking in the garden.
The mother bird was feeding its chicks. / The mother bird has been feeding its chicks.
The plates were soaking in soapy water. / The plates have been soaking in soapy water.

CJ

Are both of these sentences correct?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions