0
Viognier Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Have found in the lifetime
Dear all,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men [have found] worth drawing
[in the lifetimes] of many generations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have two questions.
[1] Since this sentence describes repetitive situations, I think we can use a [have been finding] form (even if not so neat, maybe). Am I right?
[2] If I'm right, does the form [have been finding] collocate well with [in the lifetimes]?
Or does it collocate with [for the lifetimes] better?
Thank you Very Much, in advance.
(Sorry for using many []s. Maybe my sentences are illegible. I still cannot change the basic style successfully. ??)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men [have found] worth drawing
[in the lifetimes] of many generations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have two questions.
[1] Since this sentence describes repetitive situations, I think we can use a [have been finding] form (even if not so neat, maybe). Am I right?
[2] If I'm right, does the form [have been finding] collocate well with [in the lifetimes]?
Or does it collocate with [for the lifetimes] better?
Thank you Very Much, in advance.
(Sorry for using many []s. Maybe my sentences are illegible. I still cannot change the basic style successfully. ??)
Top answer
Hello V. 'Have been finding' sounds a little odd, here; it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations'. Also, 'generations' already implies 'lifetimes'.
- Hello V.
- 'Have been finding' sounds a little odd, here; it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations'.
- Also, 'generations' already implies 'lifetimes'.
- " MrP
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
Hello V.
'Have been finding' sounds a little odd, here; it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations'. Also, 'generations' already implies 'lifetimes'. So you may want to consider:
"Our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men have found it worth while drawing over many generations."
MrP
'Have been finding' sounds a little odd, here; it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations'. Also, 'generations' already implies 'lifetimes'. So you may want to consider:
"Our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men have found it worth while drawing over many generations."
MrP
00
Thank you Very Much for your reply, MrPedantic.
I can understand that 'have been finding' sounds odd. It seems an interesting point that [it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations']. You have a point.
Then I change my sentences; could I ask you a little bit more?
#1 He found/noticed that typo in an hour.
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour.
I can understand that 'have been finding' sounds odd. It seems an interesting point that [it seems a little too immediate, in the context of 'generations']. You have a point.
Then I change my sentences; could I ask you a little bit more?
#1 He found/noticed that typo in an hour.
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour.
00
Sorry if I'm intruding...
#1 He found/noticed that typo in an hour. / yes... maybe in one hour? or "it took him an/one hour to notice/find the typo? You can also use "within" here: "he noticed/found the typo within an/the hour"
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour. / NO
#3 Many people found/noticed that typo in an hour. / same as for #1
#4 Many peop
#1 He found/noticed that typo in an hour. / yes... maybe in one hour? or "it took him an/one hour to notice/find the typo? You can also use "within" here: "he noticed/found the typo within an/the hour"
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour. / NO
#3 Many people found/noticed that typo in an hour. / same as for #1
#4 Many peop
00
Hi pieanne, thank you for your help! No, I'm very glad at getting your help.
#1 -- yes, if the emphasis is on the time needed, then [in one hour] or the structure [it took him an/one hour to~] is better, I agree.
As to #2, I thought ... we can think of a very queer situation in which he 'repeatedly' noticed the same typo because of his poor memory. Only in such a strange situati
#1 -- yes, if the emphasis is on the time needed, then [in one hour] or the structure [it took him an/one hour to~] is better, I agree.
As to #2, I thought ... we can think of a very queer situation in which he 'repeatedly' noticed the same typo because of his poor memory. Only in such a strange situati
00
Hi pieanne, thank you for your help! Intrude..? no! I'm very glad at getting your help.
#1 -- yes, if the emphasis is on the time needed, then [in one hour] or the structure [it took him an/one hour to~] is better, clearer, I agree.
As to #2, I thought ... we can think of a very queer situation in which he 'repeatedly' noticed the same typo because of his poor memory. Only in s
#1 -- yes, if the emphasis is on the time needed, then [in one hour] or the structure [it took him an/one hour to~] is better, clearer, I agree.
As to #2, I thought ... we can think of a very queer situation in which he 'repeatedly' noticed the same typo because of his poor memory. Only in s
00
Hello V.
Yes, it would have to be a very strange context:
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour.
Perhaps an alien would take an hour to notice a typo, if its mental processes were 3600 times slower than ours...
See you,
MrP
Yes, it would have to be a very strange context:
#2 He found/noticed that typo for an hour.
Perhaps an alien would take an hour to notice a typo, if its mental processes were 3600 times slower than ours...
See you,
MrP
00
Allow me tojump in , too.
For your queer contexts, 'noticed' seems more viable than 'found'. It is actually not at all odd to say, "notice something for an hour"--even if the 'something' is a typo. 'To notice' easily translates into: 'to treat with attention'...as in a meditative gaze.
For your queer contexts, 'noticed' seems more viable than 'found'. It is actually not at all odd to say, "notice something for an hour"--even if the 'something' is a typo. 'To notice' easily translates into: 'to treat with attention'...as in a meditative gaze.
00
Hello MrPedantic, please let me add my comment to my strange question.
I think if #2 get modified as #2', then it would be interpretable, no..?
#2' For three years he found/noticed her in this club (repeatedly).
But one 'finding'-event cannot last for an hour, even if the subject is an alien. (I mean: in the meaning of "find" there's a concept of some "momentary chan
I think if #2 get modified as #2', then it would be interpretable, no..?
#2' For three years he found/noticed her in this club (repeatedly).
But one 'finding'-event cannot last for an hour, even if the subject is an alien. (I mean: in the meaning of "find" there's a concept of some "momentary chan
00
Well, it would be 'perceiving', not 'percepting'. But I think 'noticed' is very feasible, as I explained before.
00
...oh...thank you for your help, davkett !!
'Noticed' is very feasible. Oh, is that so. Interesting.
(Now I think I'd have been better use the verb 'spot' in my question, to make myself clear. I'll think it over, later.)
Have a sweet day, davkett!
'Noticed' is very feasible. Oh, is that so. Interesting.
(Now I think I'd have been better use the verb 'spot' in my question, to make myself clear. I'll think it over, later.)
Have a sweet day, davkett!
0
Related Questions