If I am being asked for the natural sentence in each case, then here only the continuous form works. Much of your English study will be devoted not to what is grammatically possible to construct, but what is in real use. These are natural:
My wife is learning French and German. My wife studies French and German.
So I should remember that the verb to learn is always used in the progressive and to study is used in simple present. Never vice versa. But does present continous in your first sentence suggest that the action is temporary? Why have I always been told that using the verb to study when talking about languages is wrong? Thanks
I cannot surmise what any of your 'teachers' have told you. I can only repeat: much of your English study will be devoted not to what is grammatically possible to construct, but what is in real use.
So as far as I understood, If somebody still says; 'My wife is studying French' instead of 'studies' it will be correct , but it will not sound natural, right? Please answer this question it's a very important one; My wife is learning French and German. It is a temporary action isn't it?
So as far as I understood, If somebody still says; 'My wife is studying French' instead of 'studies' it will be correct , but it will not sound natural, right?-- With 'study', both sound natural. Please answer this question it's a very important one; My wife is learning French and German. It is a temporary action isn't it?-- No, it is a current activity.