[Grammar] "I love you for 2 years."

[sky3120]

"I love you for a long time."

"I love you for 2 years."

Are those correct? I think we need to change the verb tense but I am not sure if it is acceptable or correct. What do you teachers think about it? Thank you so much as usual.

 

[philo2009]

"I love you for a long time."

"I love you for 2 years."

Are those correct? I think we need to change the verb tense but I am not sure if it is acceptable or correct. What do you teachers think about it? Thank you so much as usual.

No. You need either past or present/past perfect.

 

[emsr2d2]

Or use a future form.

 

[philo2009]

Yes, structurally possible, of course, but semantically rather improbable (one is hardly likely to set a time limit on future love!)

 

[HanibalII]

"I love you for a long time."

"I love you for 2 years."

Are those correct? I think we need to change the verb tense but I am not sure if it is acceptable or correct. What do you teachers think about it? Thank you so much as usual.

"I've loved you for a long time" - Past tense

"I will love you for a long time" - Present tense

"I've loved you for two years" - Past tense

 

[5jj]

"I've loved you for a long time" - [STRIKE]Past tense[/STRIKE] present perfect

"I will love you for a long time" - [STRIKE]Present tense[/STRIKE]a modal form, sometimes called the future tense.

"I've loved you for two years" - [STRIKE]Past tense[/STRIKE] present perfect

5

 

[Rover_KE]

HanibalII, please resume stating that you are not a teacher...yet.

Thank you.

 

[HanibalII]

5

hmm. I shall have to look that up.

 

[emsr2d2]

HanibalII, please resume stating that you are not a teacher...yet.

Thank you.

It still states that clearly in hanibalII's signature line.

 

[Rover_KE]

It still states that clearly in hanibalII's signature line.

But students reading our replies don't go to the trouble of perusing our profiles.

 

[bhaisahab]

hmm. I shall have to look that up.

Yes, you should do that.

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

But students reading our replies don't go to the trouble of perusing our profiles.

I can see 5jj's, emsr2d2's and HanibalII's signatures below their posts (without going to their profile page), but I had to enable this feature manually by going to Settings -> My Account -> General Settings -> Thread Display Options -> Visible Post Elements and then ticking the "Show Signatures"-box.

 

[BobK]

Yes, structurally possible, of course, but semantically rather improbable (one is hardly likely to set a time limit on future love!)

:up: And even, in - say - a summary of such an improbable contract - even the present would be 'possible': 'OK, that's all agreed then: I love you for two years and you do your share of the housework...' But this sort of hypothetical use is of little or no relevance to actual language.

b

 

[emsr2d2]

I can see 5jj's, emsr2d2's and HanibalII's signatures below their posts (without going to their profile page), but I had to enable this feature manually by going to Settings -> My Account -> General Settings -> Thread Display Options -> Visible Post Elements and then ticking the "Show Signatures"-box.

Really? I assumed all signature lines were visible by default. That might need to be looked at by the webmaster!

 

[5jj]

Really? I assumed all signature lines were visible by default.

So did I.