0
Anonymous Posted 11 years ago
Grammar

difference between 'is' and 'been'

I would like to know the difference between following sentences
He is a teacher and
He has been a teacher ( is time expression is necessary here? can't we use this sentence without time expressions such as 'since' or 'for' or 'recently'. If this are used without time expressions, explain broadly by giving examples.)
  

Top answer

"He has been a teacher" (with no other words) implies that he was a teacher once, but is no longer a teacher. However, it is not the most usual way of expressing this idea. "He used to be a teacher", for example, would be more common.

— GPY

  • "He has been a teacher" (with no other words) implies that he was a teacher once, but is no longer a teacher.
  • However, it is not the most usual way of expressing this idea.
  • "He used to be a teacher", for example, would be more common.
  • " followed by a time reference implies that he still is a teacher.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

9 Answers
0
"He has been a teacher" (with no other words) implies that he was a teacher once, but is no longer a teacher. However, it is not the most usual way of expressing this idea. "He used to be a teacher", for example, would be more common.

"He has been a teacher for/since ..." followed by a time reference implies that he still is a teacher.
0
0
Then, what is difference between 'He has just been here.' & 'He was here few time ago.'
0
0
Anonymous Then, what is difference between 'He has just been here.' & 'He was here few time ago.'
"He was here few time ago" is not correct English. You can say "He was here a short time/while ago" or "He was here a few minutes/moments ago". These have a similar meaning to "He has just been here", but "He has just been here" is possibly more likely to imply a
0
0
Please check my understanding.
1] He has been to London. (He went to London & came back. he is not in London now. Use of present perfect for experience)
2] He has been in London ( He went to London & left from there [short visit].he is not London now. Again use of present perfect for experience)
3] He has been in London for 2 years. ( He went to London & is still there. Use of present
0
0
Anonymous1] He has been to London. (He went to London & came back. he is not in London now. Use of present perfect for experience)
Correct.
Anonymous2] He has been in London ( He went to London & left from there [short visit].he is not London now. Again use of present perfect for experience)
That meaning is possible, but the
0
0
CalifJimAnonymous2] He has been in London ( He went to London & left from there [short visit].he is not London now. Again use of present perfect for experience)That meaning is possible, but there's also a second meaning:He went to London and he is still there.
I am confused with second meaning of sentence 2] with following sentence

He has just been he
0
0
AnonymousI am confused with second meaning of sentence 2] with following sentence
The second meaning does not apply this new sentence.

He has just been here can't be interpreted to mean that he is still here.
AnonymousIf I say 'he has been in London', how the listener will understand the meaning? (he left from London or
0
0
Thanks a lot Mr. CalifJim. You have explained me very nice way.
But, still I am not able to understand, if the sentence "He has been in London" has two different meaning, why can't the sentence "He has been here.'' have?
Context-1
---- Where is John? I haven been looking for him.
---- He has been here with me but now you won't meet him until next week.
0
0
Anonymousif the sentence "He has been in London" has two different meaning, why can't the sentence "He has been here.'' have?
Good examples! Yes, I hadn't thought of those examples, so I didn't think it could have both meanings. But you have proved that both meanings are possible, so I have to change my mind. Good work!
0

Related Questions