Present Perfect Tense

Vocaboly.com
Vocabulary builder software for SAT, TOEFL, GRE, GMAT and more

FAQ

Memberlist

Profile

Present Perfect Tense
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.english.usage

Author

Message

Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:01 am Post subject: Present Perfect Tense

Hi, With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple past tense? "She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter." Is "She wrote me emails when I was in London last Easter." grammatically wrong? Cheers, Michael

Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:01 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Joachim Pense wrote:

Quote:

dayzman@hotmail.com:

Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Is

"She wrote me emails when I was in London last Easter."

grammatically wrong?

I am not a native speaker, but according to what I've been taught, the
present perfect version is grammatically wrong, because giving an explicite
time/date (like the "when I was" clause) prohibits the present perfect. So
the past version would be right.

Joachim

My hunch is based a similar line. It'd be great if someone could
confirm this.

Cheers,

Michael

Joachim Pense
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:01 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

dayzman@hotmail.com:

Quote:

Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Is

"She wrote me emails when I was in London last Easter."

grammatically wrong?

I am not a native speaker, but according to what I've been taught, the
present perfect version is grammatically wrong, because giving an explicite
time/date (like the "when I was" clause) prohibits the present perfect. So
the past version would be right.

Joachim

Adrian Bailey
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:46 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

<dayzman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131165234.009931.134550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Quote:

Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

You could say that a present-perfect thought gave way to a simple-past
thought. So even though the sentence is faulty, it makes sense.

Adrian

Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:23 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Wrong. In order to use the present perfect, the action must continue
into the present.

Quote:

Is

"She wrote me emails when I was in London last Easter."

grammatically wrong?

It is the correct version.

GFH

Joachim Pense
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 9:43 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

georgeh@ankerstein.org:

Quote:

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Wrong. In order to use the present perfect, the action must continue
into the present.

Really? Are you sure you do not mean the present perfect continuous form?

I've been told the _result_ of the action must continue into the present,
plus there must not be a date/time indication. So "She has written me
emails" would be ok if these emails are still in my mailbox (or maybe my
memory).

Joachim

CDB
Guest

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:08 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

<dayzman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131173886.633794.241490@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Quote:

Joachim Pense wrote:
dayzman@hotmail.com:

Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not
simple
past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last
Easter."

Is

"She wrote me emails when I was in London last Easter."

grammatically wrong?

I am not a native speaker, but according to what I've been taught,
the
present perfect version is grammatically wrong, because giving an
explicite
time/date (like the "when I was" clause) prohibits the present
perfect. So
the past version would be right.

Joachim

My hunch is based a similar line. It'd be great if someone could
confirm this.

I confirm it, in my official capacity as native English speaker, North
American division. You often hear sentences like that in informal
English, though. The speaker starts off with "She has written me
emails" and then decides to specify when she wrote them, but can't be
bothered to reformulate the sentence. "She has written me emails[;
she wrote them] when I was in London last Easter." You might find a
comma after "emails", indicating a pause in the flow of speech while
the speaker shifts gears.

Django Cat
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 1:05 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Joachim Pense wrote:

Quote:

georgeh@ankerstein.org:

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not
simple >> past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Wrong. In order to use the present perfect, the action must
continue into the present.

Really? Are you sure you do not mean the present perfect continuous
form?

I've been told the result of the action must continue into the
present, plus there must not be a date/time indication. So "She has
written me emails" would be ok if these emails are still in my
mailbox (or maybe my memory).

Joachim

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished. It's
the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the *effect* continues', pp continuous
means 'the *action* continues'", oh were it that simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it to
boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue into the
present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests we've been
repeating the action over and over, maybe because our guests for tea
haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you use pp:
'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's forgotten her
keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:00 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Django Cat wrote:

Quote:

Joachim Pense wrote:

georgeh@ankerstein.org:

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and not
simple >> past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last Easter."

Wrong. In order to use the present perfect, the action must
continue into the present.

Really? Are you sure you do not mean the present perfect continuous
form?

I've been told the result of the action must continue into the
present, plus there must not be a date/time indication. So "She has
written me emails" would be ok if these emails are still in my
mailbox (or maybe my memory).

Joachim

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished. It's
the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the *effect* continues', pp continuous
means 'the *action* continues'", oh were it that simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it to
boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue into the
present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests we've been
repeating the action over and over, maybe because our guests for tea
haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you use pp:
'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's forgotten her
keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

Hi,

How about with the following sentences:

"If you are nontheless interested in this work, I will be more than
happy to send you the publication once it is finalised."

"If you are nontheless interested in this work, I will be more than
happy to send you the publication once it has been finalised."

Can pp (2) be used in this context?

Cheers,

Michael

Django Cat
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:14 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

Django Cat wrote:
Joachim Pense wrote:

georgeh@ankerstein.org:

dayzman@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi,

With the following sentence, why is present perfect used and
not simple >> past tense?

"She has also written me emails when I was in London last
Easter."

Wrong. In order to use the present perfect, the action must
continue into the present.

Really? Are you sure you do not mean the present perfect
continuous form?

I've been told the result of the action must continue into the
present, plus there must not be a date/time indication. So "She
has written me emails" would be ok if these emails are still in my
mailbox (or maybe my memory).

Joachim

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished.
It's the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds
non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the effect continues', pp continuous
means 'the action continues'", oh were it that simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it to
boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue into
the present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests we've been
repeating the action over and over, maybe because our guests for tea
haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you use pp:
'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's forgotten her
keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

Hi,

How about with the following sentences:

"If you are nontheless interested in this work, I will be more than
happy to send you the publication once it is finalised."

"If you are nontheless interested in this work, I will be more than
happy to send you the publication once it has been finalised."

Can pp (2) be used in this context?

Cheers,

Michael

I'd say both examples are fine; I'd probably be inclined to use the
first because there's fewer words in it: some people might read the
second as being slighty more formal. There's also more of a suggestion
in the pp version of an agent doing the finalising...

DC, grading papers with The Archers Omnibus.

Gary Eickmeier
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 9:32 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Django Cat wrote:

Quote:

"I have killed a lot of people in my line of work, but I'm done with that."

"I have corrected people's grammar on usenet whenever possible, but I
don't do it any more."

"I have tried to lose weight, but it just doesn't work."

Are these illogical?

Gary Eickmeier

Django Cat
Guest

Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:43 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Gary Eickmeier wrote:

Quote:

Django Cat wrote:

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished.
It's the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds
non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the effect continues', pp continuous
means 'the action continues'", oh were it that simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it to
boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue into
the present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests we've been
repeating the action over and over, maybe because our guests for tea
haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you use pp:
'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's forgotten her
keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

"I have killed a lot of people in my line of work, but I'm done with
that."

"I have corrected people's grammar on usenet whenever possible, but I
don't do it any more."

"I have tried to lose weight, but it just doesn't work."

Are these illogical?

Gary Eickmeier

They're problematic, and AmE & BrE usage diverges, with AmE being far
more likely to use Simple Past where BrE would use Present Perfect (as
in 'Did you eat yet?' vs 'Have you eaten yet?').

I started writing they were fine, because you're still alive - your
life, here the timeframe of reference, continues. So there's potential
for the situation to change or develop - you might start killing people
again, start correcting grammar again, or finally lose that weight.

But the point you're making is that changes have been made... mmm
(reads again)... first one depends on whether you're still in that line
of work - if you've retired it doesn't work; the second one you're
explicitly saying you don't do it any more, the timeframe is closed so
sp makes more sense... but I don't think the last one stresses
finality, so I'd stay with pp.

This though isn't logical (or at any rate grammatical as we teach
grammar to ESL students):

* "Eisenhower has been President".

Man's dead. The timeframe is closed, and the situation is now fixed as
he can't be President again.

DC

Gary Eickmeier
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:16 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Django Cat wrote:

Quote:

Gary Eickmeier wrote:

Django Cat wrote:

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished.
It's the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds
non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the effect continues', pp continuous
means 'the action continues'", oh were it that simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it to
boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue into
the present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests we've been
repeating the action over and over, maybe because our guests for tea
haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you use pp:
'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's forgotten her
keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

"I have killed a lot of people in my line of work, but I'm done with
that."

"I have corrected people's grammar on usenet whenever possible, but I
don't do it any more."

"I have tried to lose weight, but it just doesn't work."

Are these illogical?

Gary Eickmeier

They're problematic, and AmE & BrE usage diverges, with AmE being far
more likely to use Simple Past where BrE would use Present Perfect (as
in 'Did you eat yet?' vs 'Have you eaten yet?').

I started writing they were fine, because you're still alive - your
life, here the timeframe of reference, continues. So there's potential
for the situation to change or develop - you might start killing people
again, start correcting grammar again, or finally lose that weight.

But the point you're making is that changes have been made... mmm
(reads again)... first one depends on whether you're still in that line
of work - if you've retired it doesn't work; the second one you're
explicitly saying you don't do it any more, the timeframe is closed so
sp makes more sense... but I don't think the last one stresses
finality, so I'd stay with pp.

This though isn't logical (or at any rate grammatical as we teach
grammar to ESL students):

* "Eisenhower has been President".

Man's dead. The timeframe is closed, and the situation is now fixed as
he can't be President again.

OK - that example makes it clearer what you are getting at. In my
examples, there is a possibility that I may revert to the former action,
so it isn't wrong. But if it were Al Capone, you wouldn't say "Al Capone
has been killing people for years, but doesn't do it any more." I wonder
if I have always used that principle in my standard wording, but just
never realized what I was basing it on. Whatever makes sense when you
read it, I guess.

GAry Eickmeier

Django Cat
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 1:19 am Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

Gary Eickmeier wrote:

Quote:

Django Cat wrote:
Gary Eickmeier wrote:

Django Cat wrote:

No. 'When I was' and 'last Easter' mark time which is finished.
It's the first example which is 'wrong' - or at least sounds
non-native.

As for "present perfect means 'the effect continues', pp
continuous means 'the action continues'", oh were it that
simple, but it ain't.

If I say 'I've put the kettle on' it means we're waiting for it
to boil, so we can have tea; the action and its effect continue
into the present. ('I've been putting the kettle on' suggests
we've been repeating the action over and over, maybe because
our guests for tea haven't turned up yet).

And no, you don't need a date/time indication every time you
use pp: 'I've not been to Mongolia'; 'I've washed up'; 'She's
forgotten her keys'.

I've finished.

DC. ESL teacher for a very long time.

"I have killed a lot of people in my line of work, but I'm done
with that."

"I have corrected people's grammar on usenet whenever possible,
but I don't do it any more."

"I have tried to lose weight, but it just doesn't work."

Are these illogical?

Gary Eickmeier

They're problematic, and AmE & BrE usage diverges, with AmE being
far more likely to use Simple Past where BrE would use Present
Perfect (as in 'Did you eat yet?' vs 'Have you eaten yet?').

I started writing they were fine, because you're still alive - your
life, here the timeframe of reference, continues. So there's
potential for the situation to change or develop - you might start
killing people again, start correcting grammar again, or finally
lose that weight.

But the point you're making is that changes have been made... mmm
(reads again)... first one depends on whether you're still in that
line of work - if you've retired it doesn't work; the second one
you're explicitly saying you don't do it any more, the timeframe is
closed so sp makes more sense... but I don't think the last one
stresses finality, so I'd stay with pp.

This though isn't logical (or at any rate grammatical as we teach
grammar to ESL students):

* "Eisenhower has been President".

Man's dead. The timeframe is closed, and the situation is now
fixed as he can't be President again.

OK - that example makes it clearer what you are getting at. In my
examples, there is a possibility that I may revert to the former
action, so it isn't wrong. But if it were Al Capone, you wouldn't say
"Al Capone has been killing people for years, but doesn't do it any
more." I wonder if I have always used that principle in my standard
wording, but just never realized what I was basing it on. Whatever
makes sense when you read it, I guess.

GAry Eickmeier

I think it's one of those things that if you're a native speaker you do
without giving the slightest thought to. It's only when you have to
teach English to foreign learners, and find that it's a thing which has
no parallel in other languages (none that I know of anyway) and which
really freaks learners out, that you start giving it any thought.

My understanding is that the simple vs present thing (linguists talk
about the 'present or simple *aspect*') stems from English's duel roots
in Germanic Languages and Norman French. Faced with two alternative
ways of talking about past time, English co-opts both, and assigns
slightly different uses to them.

DC

Nicole Floyd
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:09 pm Post subject: Re: Present Perfect Tense

I was taught that the simple form should always be used.

Last Easter(time) in London(place) she wrote me emails.
Last Easter in Londer she wrote me emails.

This was a struggle because I also speak German. Both are my mother
language.

Perhaps a German can translate this: The car of my friends fathers was
driven by us before we knew it had all the gas driven out.

Lava

<dayzman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131165234.009931.134550@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Quote:

	Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.english.usage	All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Office Forum Access Forum Electronics Windows Server Exchange Server
New Topics Powered by phpBB