0
Anonymous Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
What's the difference present perfect and present perfect progressive tense
What's the difference in meaning between the present perfect and present perfect continuous tenses?
For example:
(1) She has worked here for 20 years (present perfect)
(2) She has been working here for 20 years (present perfect continuous)
The only difference I can find is that in sentence (1), she may not be working here henceforth, whereas in sentence (2), the implication is that she still works here. Is this the only difference? I don't think sentence (1) implies she definitely no longer works here, and if she does still work here, then the meanings of sentences (1) and (2) are the same.
For example:
(1) She has worked here for 20 years (present perfect)
(2) She has been working here for 20 years (present perfect continuous)
The only difference I can find is that in sentence (1), she may not be working here henceforth, whereas in sentence (2), the implication is that she still works here. Is this the only difference? I don't think sentence (1) implies she definitely no longer works here, and if she does still work here, then the meanings of sentences (1) and (2) are the same.
Top answer
The difference - or the amount of difference - is connected with the particular verb in a particular usage. Some verbs show little distinction (like "work"). The difference is more obvious with other verbs.
- The difference - or the amount of difference - is connected with the particular verb in a particular usage.
- Some verbs show little distinction (like "work").
- The difference is more obvious with other verbs.
- I've watched Casa Blanca .
- ) I've been watching Casa Blanca .
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
7 Answers
0
The difference - or the amount of difference - is connected with the particular verb in a particular usage. Some verbs show little distinction (like "work"). The difference is more obvious with other verbs.
I've watched Casa Blanca. (at some time before now - maybe even two or three times - I had the experience of watching that movie from beginning to end - I had a "watc
I've watched Casa Blanca. (at some time before now - maybe even two or three times - I had the experience of watching that movie from beginning to end - I had a "watc
00
Well said, Calif Jim. I've encountered lots of these unusual nuances and have tried to understand it, but I like your succinct explaination.
00
1. Amy has been writing the letter for two hours.
2. Amy has written the letter for two hours.
#1 is supposed to be correct. Is #2 also acceptable?
2. Amy has written the letter for two hours.
#1 is supposed to be correct. Is #2 also acceptable?
00
# 1 sounds fine to my ear.
# 2 - is sounds a bit stiff due to the recent time, "2 hours". Pres. perf works better with a longer time span.
I have studied English for 15 years.
It's fine If it's: Amy has written letters to her boyfirend in English for two months but without response.
# 2 - is sounds a bit stiff due to the recent time, "2 hours". Pres. perf works better with a longer time span.
I have studied English for 15 years.
It's fine If it's: Amy has written letters to her boyfirend in English for two months but without response.
00
sitifan1. Amy has been writing the letter for two hours.I don't find that #2 can be contextualized in a way that makes it idiomatic and acceptable, no.
2. Amy has written the letter for two hours.
#1 is supposed to be correct. Is #2 also acceptable?
These would strike me as correct:
Amy has been writing that letter for t
00
3. Amy has written three letters for two hours.
4. Amy has written three letters since lunchtime.
Are the above sentences acceptable?
4. Amy has written three letters since lunchtime.
Are the above sentences acceptable?
00
Related Questions