Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 68
  1. #21
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Quote Originally Posted by Casiopea
    It is correct. Mind you, it's a transformation.

    He started living in this flat two months ago.
    Question: Since when did you start living in this flat?
    Answer: Since two months ago.

    => 'two months ago' functions as an adverbial phrase. 'since' tells us it's connected in time to 'started living'.

    We are looking at the architecture of the langauge, its mathematical code. Without the connection, though, the "context" 'started living', the sentence 'He started living in this flat *since two months ago', on it's own like that, is indeed semantically awkward. "for" is required in that enviornment, unless, that is, there is additional context to work from, which there was in this case, but was omitted.

    Context is important.

    I understand the logic of "since two months ago". "Two months ago" means the specific time. Whether this exam says it's right or wrong, it still sounds rather odd and unusual to me. I don't suspect I would hear it. It would not occur to me to say it. Maybe if I ask someone here, he/she will say "sure, why not", but I would have my doubts about it still. I don't think it's really the best way of expressing "since when".

    If anyone really thinks it's "okay", then I have to ask: Why didn't anyone rewrite the sentence with "since...ago" as an answer to the original question? mm.... ?

    I feel that the writers at this site would have included a "since...ago" example if it were really a possibility to them. http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html

    Here is an example at a site. I still don't feel comfortable with it. Maybe it's just me? Who knows?

    I've been sick since three days ago

    I agree with Paco's dictionary as well.
    Last edited by Steven D; 29-May-2005 at 20:22.

  2. #22
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Quote Originally Posted by mesmark
    I have answered your question.

    It is correct. You can argue that it sounds funny all day long but like I have said and Marylin has said since a few hours ago it is technically correct. Again you can argue that this is just a technicality but we will turn around and say, "So...." To the question "Is it correct? Can I say this?" the answer is YES.

    To the question "Should I say this?" the answer is NO

    We have all agreed that it isn't natural or it isn't something we would say or should teach, but it is technically correct.
    In response to that, I can only say this:

    Would you then advise against using it? In other words: If I were you, I wouldn't say it.


    We have all agreed that it isn't natural or it isn't something we would say or should teach, but it is technically correct.

    What would you say to those learning how to speak English?

    1. Use it if the context permits it - no problem. It's correct.
    2. No, don't use it. It's not good.
    3. No, don't use it. It's not good. However, it's technically correct.
    Here it is, but why doesn't it sound good to me?

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...+a+year+ago%22

    I like this better: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...e+last+year%22

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...+since+2004%22

  3. #23
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    44,205
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    I would expand Indian English to include British English too. I don't think I've ever taught it as a form, but it doesn't strike me as in any way odd.

  4. #24
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Quote Originally Posted by tdol
    I would expand Indian English to include British English too. I don't think I've ever taught it as a form, but it doesn't strike me as in any way odd.

    mm..... You've got me wondering then. If it doesn't sound odd in any way, then why not teach it as a form? Here it is:

    "They've been thinking about getting a new copy machine since 4 months ago."

    I wouldn't teach it as a form.
    Last edited by Steven D; 29-May-2005 at 13:48.

  5. #25
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    44,205
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    If it came up, I wouldn't class it as an error, though.

  6. #26
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Quote Originally Posted by tdol
    If it came up, I wouldn't class it as an error, though.
    While I can understand why, I would find it difficult to reckon "it's not advisable to use it" with "it's not an error", which seems to be the consensus.

    We have all agreed that it isn't natural or it isn't something we would say or should teach, but it is technically correct.
    I would also find it of interest that no one seems to go out of their way to present it. Let's wait for it to happen. I couldn't find it in a grammar book.

    Here it is at the bottom of this page: http://www.english-zone.com/teach/sincefora.html

    NOTE: Therefore, it's possible to have both in the same phrase (Although this may seem strange to some native speakers).

    http://www.iei.uiuc.edu/structure/st...1/time.html#sa

    It seems strange to me.

    By the way, I misread the Wikipedia article. It's not really Indian English. I missed "instead of".
    Last edited by Steven D; 29-May-2005 at 13:48.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    We're dealing with a "transformation". It's a linguistic process known as replacement strategy:

    Max: He lived here two months ago.
    Pat: Since when?
    Max: Since two months ago. (grammatical given the context)

    "when" is replaced by the phrase "two months ago". The reason being, they both fit into the slot as adverbs. That's what the 'transformation' is about. As for traditional grammar, it doesn't fit the pattern, you're right, but why argue that when that is neither here nor there? The PET question is about the function and distribution of "since". It takes an adverb as its object, and more importantly, according to usage, if an adverb has already been stated in context, it's adopted, no matter if it goes against the traditional rule.

    "transformation": to change a form

  8. #28
    Mister Micawber's Avatar
    Mister Micawber is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,855
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    .
    I hate to weigh in late, especially since I am so lightweight here, but I find the expression reasonably common and unexceptional (aside from the lack of efficiency compared to the terse 'for'), so that I can't quite understand the length of discussion. Perhaps you live in totally different milieux, but to me expressions such as

    'I haven't seen her since three days ago, at the fraternity party'

    Seem common enough not to raise an eyebrow. 'X time ago' is clearly a point in time, no more nor less than 'last Tuesday' or 'Christmas', and I can see no reason why it would not naturally fall into place as the object of the same preposition of duration.

    You seem to admit the grammar; the concordancer brings up a number of examples of its written use-- albeit in a variety of structures which you have not yet discussed here:

    / ed much about interstellar drives since a hundred years ago; that is all I /
    / ked his father, How long is it ago since this came unto him? And he said, O /
    / the safe where they had been ever since our return so long ago. We were s /
    / Why? Ah, if I only knew. When? Since I was here an hour ago. As to the /
    / "But as it's only two hours ago since he was here, it might look prematu /
    / following him out. | Ever since he'd lost his job two weeks ago, th /
    / {0D.Sc.}> IT is some years ago since I first became interested in the p /
    / ing things that has happened to me since my shop opened nine years ago." /
    / g up in Paris all over the place. Since six months ago, when I calculated t /

    Perhaps the awkwardness appears only in isolation?

    .

  9. #29
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Quote Originally Posted by Casiopea
    We're dealing with a "transformation". It's a linguistic process known as replacement strategy:

    Max: He lived here two months ago.
    Pat: Since when?
    Max: Since two months ago. (grammatical given the context)

    "when" is replaced by the phrase "two months ago". The reason being, they both fit into the slot as adverbs. That's what the 'transformation' is about. As for traditional grammar, it doesn't fit the pattern, you're right, but why argue that when that is neither here nor there? The PET question is about the function and distribution of "since". It takes an adverb as its object, and more importantly, according to usage, if an adverb has already been stated in context, it's adopted, no matter if it goes against the traditional rule.

    "transformation": to change a form
    Yes, that's what transformation means.

    About "since..ago", - yes, I get the point. No problem. However, the form "since...ago" seems to be something that we can say is not commonplace at all, and one might only have to ask why that's so.
    Last edited by Steven D; 30-May-2005 at 22:19.

  10. #30
    Steven D's Avatar
    Steven D is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    834
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: since two months ago

    Last edited by Steven D; 30-May-2005 at 00:37.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Apostrophe
    By jack in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 28-Dec-2004, 19:26
  2. had been already OR was already; best 5(th)
    By Wai_Wai in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 17-Oct-2004, 21:16
  3. a couple or couple
    By gonghai in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-Oct-2004, 15:00
  4. time clause
    By navi tasan in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21-Aug-2004, 14:45
  5. grammar in context
    By hela in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-Jun-2004, 20:26

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •