The present perfect usage The Next CEO of Stack Overflow“Have you heard?” vs “Did you hear?” and “Sally broke/has broken her leg”Unfinished time word and Present perfectPast Perfect vs. Present PerfectSimple Past and Present Perfect togetherpresent perfect vs past perfect usageHow relevant is the experiential use of the present perfect to the present point of reference?Present Perfect usage instead of Past simpleHow to distinguish and use the present perfect for the recent past?present perfect usagePresent perfect with a past temporal expression
Grabbing quick drinks
Is it professional to write unrelated content in an almost-empty email?
What is the purpose of the Evocation wizard's Potent Cantrip feature?
Is it ever safe to open a suspicious HTML file (e.g. email attachment)?
Is it allowed to be an Apple trusted developer with pure Java
Running a General Election and the European Elections together
If the updated MCAS software needs two AOA sensors, doesn't that introduce a new single point of failure?
Is wanting to ask what to write an indication that you need to change your story?
Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?
If the heap is zero-initialized for security, then why is the stack merely uninitialized?
Rotate a column
I want to make a picture in physics with TikZ. Can you help me?
Does increasing your ability score affect your main stat?
Why, when going from special to general relativity, do we just replace partial derivatives with covariant derivatives?
Can we say or write : "No, it'sn't"?
Is micro rebar a better way to reinforce concrete than rebar?
What's the best way to handle refactoring a big file?
What happened in Rome, when the western empire "fell"?
Why this way of making earth uninhabitable in Interstellar?
Why am I allowed to create multiple unique pointers from a single object?
Why do remote companies require working in the US?
Proper way to express "He disappeared them"
Why is quantifier elimination desirable for a given theory?
How to count occurrences of text in a file?
The present perfect usage
The Next CEO of Stack Overflow“Have you heard?” vs “Did you hear?” and “Sally broke/has broken her leg”Unfinished time word and Present perfectPast Perfect vs. Present PerfectSimple Past and Present Perfect togetherpresent perfect vs past perfect usageHow relevant is the experiential use of the present perfect to the present point of reference?Present Perfect usage instead of Past simpleHow to distinguish and use the present perfect for the recent past?present perfect usagePresent perfect with a past temporal expression
According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL) by Geoffrey. K. Pullum and Rodney Huddlestone, there are four different uses of the present perfect tense: the continuative, the experimental (or existential) perfect, the resultative perfect, and the perfect of recent past. (2002 :143-145)
Not so long ago, I came across a grammar book, in which the present perfect tense was explained differently. It states that – "when we can not make a present tense sentence with a similar meaning, we do not normally use the present perfect (even if we are giving " news ").
My question is – why cannot we use the present perfect tense, to be more precise, the perfect of recent past when we are giving "news"? For example:
- Granny hit me!
Instead, why can't we say:
- Granny has hit me!
Especially if the impact of the hit is visible on the body? Can we remember this as a rule of thumb? Does it sound okay to you?
present-perfect simple-past
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
add a comment |
According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL) by Geoffrey. K. Pullum and Rodney Huddlestone, there are four different uses of the present perfect tense: the continuative, the experimental (or existential) perfect, the resultative perfect, and the perfect of recent past. (2002 :143-145)
Not so long ago, I came across a grammar book, in which the present perfect tense was explained differently. It states that – "when we can not make a present tense sentence with a similar meaning, we do not normally use the present perfect (even if we are giving " news ").
My question is – why cannot we use the present perfect tense, to be more precise, the perfect of recent past when we are giving "news"? For example:
- Granny hit me!
Instead, why can't we say:
- Granny has hit me!
Especially if the impact of the hit is visible on the body? Can we remember this as a rule of thumb? Does it sound okay to you?
present-perfect simple-past
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31
add a comment |
According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL) by Geoffrey. K. Pullum and Rodney Huddlestone, there are four different uses of the present perfect tense: the continuative, the experimental (or existential) perfect, the resultative perfect, and the perfect of recent past. (2002 :143-145)
Not so long ago, I came across a grammar book, in which the present perfect tense was explained differently. It states that – "when we can not make a present tense sentence with a similar meaning, we do not normally use the present perfect (even if we are giving " news ").
My question is – why cannot we use the present perfect tense, to be more precise, the perfect of recent past when we are giving "news"? For example:
- Granny hit me!
Instead, why can't we say:
- Granny has hit me!
Especially if the impact of the hit is visible on the body? Can we remember this as a rule of thumb? Does it sound okay to you?
present-perfect simple-past
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL) by Geoffrey. K. Pullum and Rodney Huddlestone, there are four different uses of the present perfect tense: the continuative, the experimental (or existential) perfect, the resultative perfect, and the perfect of recent past. (2002 :143-145)
Not so long ago, I came across a grammar book, in which the present perfect tense was explained differently. It states that – "when we can not make a present tense sentence with a similar meaning, we do not normally use the present perfect (even if we are giving " news ").
My question is – why cannot we use the present perfect tense, to be more precise, the perfect of recent past when we are giving "news"? For example:
- Granny hit me!
Instead, why can't we say:
- Granny has hit me!
Especially if the impact of the hit is visible on the body? Can we remember this as a rule of thumb? Does it sound okay to you?
present-perfect simple-past
present-perfect simple-past
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
edited Mar 23 at 19:15
Mari-Lou A
62.4k56222462
62.4k56222462
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
asked Mar 22 at 0:15
BeqaBeqa
621414
621414
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31
add a comment |
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
The book you are referring to gives a summative assessment of Present Perfect far from the madding pedantic analysis. In the four differences you have mentioned from the authority, the recurring theme is that it has a present relevance. And exactly that's what your grammar book says. With the help of two negative sentences the writer affirms this relevance of present in present perfect. When this relationship with the present is gone, it becomes the thing of the past. Present perfect is at the threshold,— one step in the past, one step in present looking forward but no step further.
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
add a comment |
The grammar book whose page you include here is Practical English Usage by Michael Swan. I don't know which edition you are quoting from, but in my (third) edition the explanation is in entry 457 (perfect or past - advanced points) on page 442. Here Swan states:
We normally use the present perfect when we are thinking about past events together with their present results.
- I can't come to your party because I 've broken my leg.
However, we usually prefer a past tense when we identify the person, thing or circumstances responsible for a present situation (because we are thinking of a past cause, not the present result). Compare:
Look what John 's given me! (thinking about the gift)
Who gave you that? (thinking about the past action of giving)
Some fool has let the cat in.
Who let the cat in?
Other examples:
Why are you crying? ~ Granny hit me. (NOT...
Granny has hit me.)
How did you get that bruise?
That's a nice picture. Did you paint it yourself?
So, it seems like a good rule of thumb to use the past simple when the speaker's focus is on the cause and the present perfect when the focus is on the result.
Note, however, that Swan hedges his explanation with words such as normally and usually. So there will be edge cases where either choice will sound acceptable to a native speaker. For example:
- Why are you crying? ~ Granny's hit me again.
The again here seems to imply that the speaker's focus is on the repetition of the action rather than on its perpetrator. Hence the present perfect sounds acceptable.
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490818%2fthe-present-perfect-usage%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The book you are referring to gives a summative assessment of Present Perfect far from the madding pedantic analysis. In the four differences you have mentioned from the authority, the recurring theme is that it has a present relevance. And exactly that's what your grammar book says. With the help of two negative sentences the writer affirms this relevance of present in present perfect. When this relationship with the present is gone, it becomes the thing of the past. Present perfect is at the threshold,— one step in the past, one step in present looking forward but no step further.
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
add a comment |
The book you are referring to gives a summative assessment of Present Perfect far from the madding pedantic analysis. In the four differences you have mentioned from the authority, the recurring theme is that it has a present relevance. And exactly that's what your grammar book says. With the help of two negative sentences the writer affirms this relevance of present in present perfect. When this relationship with the present is gone, it becomes the thing of the past. Present perfect is at the threshold,— one step in the past, one step in present looking forward but no step further.
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
add a comment |
The book you are referring to gives a summative assessment of Present Perfect far from the madding pedantic analysis. In the four differences you have mentioned from the authority, the recurring theme is that it has a present relevance. And exactly that's what your grammar book says. With the help of two negative sentences the writer affirms this relevance of present in present perfect. When this relationship with the present is gone, it becomes the thing of the past. Present perfect is at the threshold,— one step in the past, one step in present looking forward but no step further.
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
The book you are referring to gives a summative assessment of Present Perfect far from the madding pedantic analysis. In the four differences you have mentioned from the authority, the recurring theme is that it has a present relevance. And exactly that's what your grammar book says. With the help of two negative sentences the writer affirms this relevance of present in present perfect. When this relationship with the present is gone, it becomes the thing of the past. Present perfect is at the threshold,— one step in the past, one step in present looking forward but no step further.
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
answered Mar 22 at 1:55
Barid Baran AcharyaBarid Baran Acharya
1,988613
1,988613
add a comment |
add a comment |
The grammar book whose page you include here is Practical English Usage by Michael Swan. I don't know which edition you are quoting from, but in my (third) edition the explanation is in entry 457 (perfect or past - advanced points) on page 442. Here Swan states:
We normally use the present perfect when we are thinking about past events together with their present results.
- I can't come to your party because I 've broken my leg.
However, we usually prefer a past tense when we identify the person, thing or circumstances responsible for a present situation (because we are thinking of a past cause, not the present result). Compare:
Look what John 's given me! (thinking about the gift)
Who gave you that? (thinking about the past action of giving)
Some fool has let the cat in.
Who let the cat in?
Other examples:
Why are you crying? ~ Granny hit me. (NOT...
Granny has hit me.)
How did you get that bruise?
That's a nice picture. Did you paint it yourself?
So, it seems like a good rule of thumb to use the past simple when the speaker's focus is on the cause and the present perfect when the focus is on the result.
Note, however, that Swan hedges his explanation with words such as normally and usually. So there will be edge cases where either choice will sound acceptable to a native speaker. For example:
- Why are you crying? ~ Granny's hit me again.
The again here seems to imply that the speaker's focus is on the repetition of the action rather than on its perpetrator. Hence the present perfect sounds acceptable.
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
add a comment |
The grammar book whose page you include here is Practical English Usage by Michael Swan. I don't know which edition you are quoting from, but in my (third) edition the explanation is in entry 457 (perfect or past - advanced points) on page 442. Here Swan states:
We normally use the present perfect when we are thinking about past events together with their present results.
- I can't come to your party because I 've broken my leg.
However, we usually prefer a past tense when we identify the person, thing or circumstances responsible for a present situation (because we are thinking of a past cause, not the present result). Compare:
Look what John 's given me! (thinking about the gift)
Who gave you that? (thinking about the past action of giving)
Some fool has let the cat in.
Who let the cat in?
Other examples:
Why are you crying? ~ Granny hit me. (NOT...
Granny has hit me.)
How did you get that bruise?
That's a nice picture. Did you paint it yourself?
So, it seems like a good rule of thumb to use the past simple when the speaker's focus is on the cause and the present perfect when the focus is on the result.
Note, however, that Swan hedges his explanation with words such as normally and usually. So there will be edge cases where either choice will sound acceptable to a native speaker. For example:
- Why are you crying? ~ Granny's hit me again.
The again here seems to imply that the speaker's focus is on the repetition of the action rather than on its perpetrator. Hence the present perfect sounds acceptable.
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
add a comment |
The grammar book whose page you include here is Practical English Usage by Michael Swan. I don't know which edition you are quoting from, but in my (third) edition the explanation is in entry 457 (perfect or past - advanced points) on page 442. Here Swan states:
We normally use the present perfect when we are thinking about past events together with their present results.
- I can't come to your party because I 've broken my leg.
However, we usually prefer a past tense when we identify the person, thing or circumstances responsible for a present situation (because we are thinking of a past cause, not the present result). Compare:
Look what John 's given me! (thinking about the gift)
Who gave you that? (thinking about the past action of giving)
Some fool has let the cat in.
Who let the cat in?
Other examples:
Why are you crying? ~ Granny hit me. (NOT...
Granny has hit me.)
How did you get that bruise?
That's a nice picture. Did you paint it yourself?
So, it seems like a good rule of thumb to use the past simple when the speaker's focus is on the cause and the present perfect when the focus is on the result.
Note, however, that Swan hedges his explanation with words such as normally and usually. So there will be edge cases where either choice will sound acceptable to a native speaker. For example:
- Why are you crying? ~ Granny's hit me again.
The again here seems to imply that the speaker's focus is on the repetition of the action rather than on its perpetrator. Hence the present perfect sounds acceptable.
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
The grammar book whose page you include here is Practical English Usage by Michael Swan. I don't know which edition you are quoting from, but in my (third) edition the explanation is in entry 457 (perfect or past - advanced points) on page 442. Here Swan states:
We normally use the present perfect when we are thinking about past events together with their present results.
- I can't come to your party because I 've broken my leg.
However, we usually prefer a past tense when we identify the person, thing or circumstances responsible for a present situation (because we are thinking of a past cause, not the present result). Compare:
Look what John 's given me! (thinking about the gift)
Who gave you that? (thinking about the past action of giving)
Some fool has let the cat in.
Who let the cat in?
Other examples:
Why are you crying? ~ Granny hit me. (NOT...
Granny has hit me.)
How did you get that bruise?
That's a nice picture. Did you paint it yourself?
So, it seems like a good rule of thumb to use the past simple when the speaker's focus is on the cause and the present perfect when the focus is on the result.
Note, however, that Swan hedges his explanation with words such as normally and usually. So there will be edge cases where either choice will sound acceptable to a native speaker. For example:
- Why are you crying? ~ Granny's hit me again.
The again here seems to imply that the speaker's focus is on the repetition of the action rather than on its perpetrator. Hence the present perfect sounds acceptable.
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
answered Mar 22 at 8:38
ShoeShoe
25.9k43989
25.9k43989
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490818%2fthe-present-perfect-usage%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Perhaps this should be asked at ell.stackexchange.com ?? That is where learners of English ask questions.
– GEdgar
Mar 22 at 0:31