It is + a period + since? Meaning?

Question

It seems the meaning of this structure "It is + a period + since" is a little bit tricky to define.

For example, I am not quite sure what the difference is between the following sentences.

It has been 3 years since his father died.
It has been 3 years since his father was dead.

It has been 3 years since the statesman won election.
It has been 3 years since the statesman was victorious in the election.

What is the difference for this kind of pair of sentences? Could you tell me?

Thank you.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

zuotengdazuothe difference

since his father was dead is not possible. The clause after "since" must make a reference to a single point in time. Being dead is a state that lasts a long time; it can't be a point in time. So in the first pair only the first one (It has been three years since his father died) is correct.

In the second pair both "won" and "was victorious" reference a point in time, so both are correct.

Other than the fact that you use different words to describe the same situation, I don't know what more you want to know about the difference.

It has been [time period in days, weeks, years, ...] since [event at a point in time] is the formula. It's a statement of how much time has passed between a given event and the present time.

It has been a month since I read a newspaper.
It has been two weeks since Laura washed clothes.
It has been 15 years since Henry smashed his car into a tree.

CJ

Zuotengdazuo · Answer

CalifJimcan't be a point in time. So in the first pair only the first one (It has been three years since his father died) is correct.In the second pair both "won" and "was victorious" reference a point in time, so both are correct.Other than the fact that you use different words to describe the same situation, I don't know what more you want to know about the difference.

Many thanks. However that doesn't seem to be the answer I am looking for. I was taught that if "since" is followed by an instantaneous verb, the sentence of this construction means the act lasts for a period of time.
If "since" is followed by a durative verb(an act that lasts a long time), the sentence of this construction means the act has happened before but it doesn't happen any more for a period of time. So the "since" clause can make a refernce to a single point of time(instantaneous verb) or a period of time(durative verb). (I don't know if my understanding if correct.)

For example, I was told that "smoke" is a durative verb because it can last a period of time, so "It's been 3 years since he smoke" can mean "He was habituated to smoking but he doesn't smoke any more for 3 years" (not "he has been smoking for 3 years"

So I think these two sentences "It has been 3 years since the statesman won election/was victorious in the election" must differ in meaning.
The problem is: I can't tell a durative verb from an instantaneous verb.
It seems "win" is an instantaneous verb while "be victorious" is durative.

Zuotengdazuo · Answer

So I am not quite sure what your example sentences mean because I can't tell a durative verb from an instantaneous verb.

1.It has been a month since I read a newspaper.(Does it mean "I have read the newsppaper for a month" or "I haven't read the newspaper for a month"?)
2.It has been two weeks since Laura washed clothes.(She has washed clothes for two weeks? Or she hasn't washed clothes for two weeks?)
3.It has been 15 years since Henry smashed his car into a tree,(I am sure about the meaning of this sentence: there hasn't been another car accident for 15 years after that accident which happened 15 years ago)

So you see, sometimes I can't determine what the sentence of this construction means because I can interprey it in two opposite ways.
Could you shed light on it? Thank you.

Fivejedjon · Answer

This has nothing to do with 'durative' or 'instantaneous' verbs,

It has been x days/weeks/years since I did something means the last/previous time that thing happened was x days/weeks years ago,

It has been a month since I read a newspaper means the last time I read a newspaper was a month ago.

Zuotengdazuo · Answer

fivejedjonThis has nothing to do with 'durative' or 'instantaneous' verbs,It has been x days/weeks/years since I did something means the last/previous time that thing happened was x days/weeks years ago,It has been a month since I read a newspaper means the last time I read a newspaper was a month ago.

Thank you for your explanation, even though your explanation is a bit at odds with my teachers.
My teache likes comparing these pairs of sentences, claiming that one is using instantaneous verb while the other durative verb.
It is five years since he became a soldier.(My teacher says this means he joined the arm 5 years ago and now he is still a soldier, because "become" is an instantaneous verb)
It is five years since he was a soldier.(My teacher says this mean he was no longer a soldier for 5 years because "be" is a durative verb)

It is two weeks since he fell ill .(My teacher says this means he fell ill two weeks ago and he is still ill now because "fall" is an instantaneous verb)
It is two weeks since he was ill. (My teacher says this means he has recovered from his illness two weeks ago because "be" is a dura verb)

Is my teacher right or wrong?

Fivejedjon · Answer

Well, saying that BE is a durative verb does not explain "It's a week since John was rude to me" if the reference is to John poking his tongue out at me. I

I find CJ's formula "It has been [time period in days, weeks, years, ... since] [event at a point in time]". more useful than talking of instantaneous verbs and "It has been [time period in days, weeks, years, ...since [time point of the end of a state] more useful than of durative verbs.

CalifJim · Answer

zuotengdazuoThe problem is: I can't tell a durative verb from an instantaneous verb.It seems "win" is an instantaneous verb while "be victorious" is durative.

You're using "instantaneous verb" for what I would call "dynamic predicate", and "durative verb" for what I would call a "stative predicate". You have to look at the whole predicate, not just the verb. The same verb can be used two different ways — in a dynamic predicate (was victorious) or in a stative predicate (was alone). When you say someone was victorious, you mean that he won. The moment of winning (or of being victorious) is very short. You could even say "instantaneous". It doesn't matter which group of words you use to communicate this fact. So "was victorious" is not a stative predicate (doesn't contain an instantaneous verb).

zuotengdazuo"It's been 3 three years since he smoked"

He smoked three years ago (and probably before that). He has not smoked for three years.

....... smoking ..... smoking .... smoking | ... not smoking ... not smoking ... X (X = NOW)
..............................................................{ - - - - - - - three years - - - - - - - - -}

You can also say It's been three years since he has smoked if you want to focus on the fact that it was a habit before he stopped.

CJ

CalifJim · Answer

zuotengdazuoSo I am not quite sure what your example sentences mean because I can't tell a durative verb from an instantaneous verb.

Don't focus so much on identifying verb types. Focus on the meaning of the state or action or event that occurs or occurred. If the words tell you that an event occurred, it doesn't matter which specific verb is used.

Same verb, but different meanings.
Lucy had two brothers. (no event)
Lucy had a baby. (event)

It makes sense to say It's been two months since Lucy had the baby, but it makes little sense (in the intended reading) to say It's been two months since Lucy had two brothers.

CJ

CalifJim · Answer

fivejedjonI find Mr M's formula

It's not Mr M's!

CJ

Fivejedjon · Answer

Sorry, now corrected. It must have been Mr M's verification of the post that dazzled me.

It is + a period + since? Meaning?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions