measuring time using "in"

[donnach]

Is the following sentence grammatically correct:

I haven't been to class in two weeks.

Should the previous sentence, in other words, be changed to the follwing:

I haven't been to class for two weeks.

Also, what about:

I've gone to the gym five times in the last week.

Should it be:

I've gone to the gym five times during the last week.

Thanks!

 

[billmcd]

Is the following sentence grammatically correct:

I haven't been to class in two weeks.

Should the previous sentence, in other words, be changed to the follwing:

I haven't been to class for two weeks.

Also, what about:

I've gone to the gym five times in the last week.

Should it be:

I've gone to the gym five times during the last week.

Thanks!

Any/all of your examples are OK.

 

[donnach]

Really? Why does my ESL grammar book only use for and since to discuss time, I wonder.

Are there any old-school prescriptivist grammarian rules about not using in?

Thanks!

 

[5jj]

Really? Why does my ESL grammar book only use for and since to discuss time, I wonder.
It cannot list every possible construction - it would be thousands of pages long.

Are there any old-school prescriptivist grammarian rules about not using in?

In your first example 'in' was incorrect in BrE when I was at school many years ago. There are probably still quite a few older speakers of BrE who would not use it. Is your grammar book British?

 

[billmcd]

Really? Why does my ESL grammar book only use for and since to discuss time, I wonder.

Are there any old-school prescriptivist grammarian rules about not using in?

Thanks!

1) Only the author of your ESL book can answer that question. "In" as a preposition can be used to indicate inclusion and in your example, 5 times within a week.
2) Could be, but I'm not familiar with any.

 

[donnach]

In your first example 'in' was incorrect in BrE when I was at school many years ago. There are probably still quite a few older speakers of BrE who would not use it. Is your grammar book British?

No, I believe it's published by Longman/Pearson. What you're saying, though, confirms my suspicion.

 

[Tdol]

Are there any old-school prescriptivist grammarian rules about not using in?

You could probably apply the modern day prescriptivist cop-out and say that in is more colloquial. ;-)

 

[donnach]

I think a modern-day prescriptivist cop-out may come in handy for me at this point. It'll become less handy, I think, as I become more knowledgeable.

 

[mrang]

Getting a good advanced Learner dictionary can solve many Grammar issues actually. As a teacher, I do use many reference books and sometimes there may be issues that have two sides. English may not always have one answer but getting reference books like 'word by word' and others could be useful.