0
Paco2004 Posted 21 years ago
Grammar

I've called her for a year

Hello guys

I was told in school days we shouldn't say "I've called her for a year" to mean "I have a one-year experience of talking with her habitually through a phone", because, according to my teacher, "call Emotion: phone" is a one-time activity verb. He told us we should say "I've been calling her for a year" instead. But quite recently I was surprised to hear from some native speakers that "I've called her for a year" is very natural to them, though some of them said "I've been calling her for a year" is a bit better. What do you think about it? Any comment is welcome.

paco
  

Top answer

'I've called her for a year' sounds natural enough to me, (but not 'talked with her through a phone'-- it would be 'talked with her by phone'). I don't quite get the 'one-time activity' rule with 'called'. -- even 'died', in the right context, can be a repeat activity.

— Davkett

  • 'I've called her for a year' sounds natural enough to me, (but not 'talked with her through a phone'-- it would be 'talked with her by phone').
  • I don't quite get the 'one-time activity' rule with 'called'.
  • -- even 'died', in the right context, can be a repeat activity.
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.

6 Answers
0
'I've called her for a year' sounds natural enough to me, (but not 'talked with her through a phone'-- it would be 'talked with her by phone'). I don't quite get the 'one-time activity' rule with 'called'. Is there such a thing as a 'one-time' verb?-- even 'died', in the right context, can be a repeat activity.
0
0
"I've called her for a year" does indeed seem anomalous to me.
I definitely prefer "I've been calling her for a year".
0
0
Hi Davkett

Thank you for the comment and the correction of "through a phone" to "by phone". I heard from some people "I have called her for a year" is suitable to unsuccessful tries like "I have called her for a year, but to no avail". If I have really contacts with her, according to them, I have to say "I've been calling her for a year". How about this opinion? By the way I meant "a dyna
0
0
Hi CJ

Thank you for the comment. I'm now afraid my English grammar knowledge is getting obsolete because people's usage of English is changing very rapidly even in such basic matters like this.

paco
0
0
I find it a little strange. I'd vote for the progressive form too.

With a verb that suggests a continuous action, it might work:

1. I've already interrogated the suspect for an hour. There's no way she's going to talk. But if you want to try applying the excruciatingly badly written TEFL exercises, sure, be my guest...

<people's usage of English is changing very rapid
0
0
Paco2004I heard from some people "I have called her for a year" is suitable to unsuccessful tries like "I have called her for a year, but to no avail". If I have really contacts with her, according to them, I have to say "I've been calling her for a year". How about this opinion?

Something like that may have gone through my mind as I tried to hear the phrase bei
0

Related Questions