0
Simon_phlui Posted 22 years ago
Grammar
Has died for two years
I know (1) is correct while (2) is incorrect:
1. He has died.
2. He has died for two years.
It's because "die" happens and ends immediately,
and can't last for two years.
However, I notice that there are many people not
following the rule. I often see things like the following on Web:
"I have graduated for two years."
"I have retired for two years."
Do native speakers accept (2) nowadays? Thanks.
1. He has died.
2. He has died for two years.
It's because "die" happens and ends immediately,
and can't last for two years.
However, I notice that there are many people not
following the rule. I often see things like the following on Web:
"I have graduated for two years."
"I have retired for two years."
Do native speakers accept (2) nowadays? Thanks.
Top answer
No I dotn think we do accept 2. these days! ) I graduated two years ago I had graduated two years previously I have been retired for 2 years etc
- No I dotn think we do accept 2.
- these days!
- ) I graduated two years ago I had graduated two years previously I have been retired for 2 years etc
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
12 Answers
0
No I dotn think we do accept 2. these days!
to say the "meaning" of 2 I would say
"he has BEEN dead for two years"
the others can be said in various ways:
I have been a graduate for 2 yrs (I can't imagine saying I have been graduated for 2 years, dunno why!)
I graduated two years ago
I had graduated two years previously
I have been retired
to say the "meaning" of 2 I would say
"he has BEEN dead for two years"
the others can be said in various ways:
I have been a graduate for 2 yrs (I can't imagine saying I have been graduated for 2 years, dunno why!)
I graduated two years ago
I had graduated two years previously
I have been retired
00
I think ' has died ' isn't logically correct though.
He died or He is dead.
Since present perfect denotes a range of time. So ' die ' is different from other words.
eg I have completed my assignment. ( it means from the beginning up to now that I completed my work )
But it doesn't apply on ' die ' , unless we say ' He is dying to refer to the nature taki
He died or He is dead.
Since present perfect denotes a range of time. So ' die ' is different from other words.
eg I have completed my assignment. ( it means from the beginning up to now that I completed my work )
But it doesn't apply on ' die ' , unless we say ' He is dying to refer to the nature taki
00
>I think ' has died ' isn't logically correct though.
But I think both "die" and "complete" indicate a process
of stopping. "die" means stop living while "complete"
in your example means stop doing the assignment.
I have difficulty understanding why "he has died" is incorrect.
If so, how about "He has already died when she arrives."?
Do you think it's wr
But I think both "die" and "complete" indicate a process
of stopping. "die" means stop living while "complete"
in your example means stop doing the assignment.
I have difficulty understanding why "he has died" is incorrect.
If so, how about "He has already died when she arrives."?
Do you think it's wr
00
Well, I am also curious to get comments from other native speakers since I was taught so. For your example, my former English teacher would have corrected me as such.
eg. He is dead at the time of her arrival.
The previous example I gave means you started doing something up to the present moment to finish it but someone can't die from a particular time until now. He only died
eg. He is dead at the time of her arrival.
The previous example I gave means you started doing something up to the present moment to finish it but someone can't die from a particular time until now. He only died
00
"He has died" is perfectly possible, especially in converstaion.
You could add emphasis to the HAS if someone is suggesting that the man hasn't really died.
You could add emphasis to the HAS if someone is suggesting that the man hasn't really died.
00
Of course it is perfectly possible to use "He has died" in fiction. "He has died several times" is absolutely grammatically sound and would sit well in a sci-fi or horror movie.
It is also possible to use "He has died" as a statement invoking atmosphere, but again, this would only occur in narrative, not in spoken English.
So I don't think that "he has died" is ungrammatical -
It is also possible to use "He has died" as a statement invoking atmosphere, but again, this would only occur in narrative, not in spoken English.
So I don't think that "he has died" is ungrammatical -
00
0
"You could add emphasis to the HAS if someone is suggesting that the man hasn't really died."
Maybe is better to say "He DID die", if you want to emphasis?
Maybe is better to say "He DID die", if you want to emphasis?
00
I can recall being told that someone I loved had died. Rest assured that a statement like that does not require emphasis.
00
Related Questions