[Grammar] Jen lived/had been living in NYC for 5 years ...

[Lilyoftheorient]

Hi, I’m new to the forum and I have a few questions.

#1 - Jen lived in NYC for 5 years. She met her boyfriend WHILE she was living there.


#2 - Jen had been living in NYC for 5 years WHEN she met her boyfriend.


The difference:
#1 She is no longer living in New York city.
#2 She might still be living in New York City right now.

I read on an English Grammar website that present perfect can be used to describe accomplishments. My question is, can present perfect be used to describe death people’s accomplishments? Or we must use past perfect since we’ talking about people who have passed away.


- Charles Lindbergh has flown solo over the Atlantic Ocean.
- Thomas Edison has invented the light bulb we used today.

Corrections are greatly appreciated.

Lily

 

[GoesStation]

Re: English Grammar

- Charles Lindbergh has flown solo over the Atlantic Ocean.
- Thomas Edison has invented the light bulb we used today.

The present perfect doesn't work in these sentences.

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: English Grammar

Hi, I'm new to the forum and I have a few questions.

#1 - Jen lived in NYC for 5 years. She met her boyfriend WHILE she was living there.
#2 - Jen had been living in NYC for 5 years WHEN she met her boyfriend.

The difference:
#1 She is no longer living in New York city. :tick:
#2 She might still be living in New York City right now. :tick:

I read on an English grammar website that the present perfect can be used to describe accomplishments. My question is, can the present perfect be used to describe [STRIKE]death[/STRIKE] dead people's accomplishments? Or [STRIKE]we[/STRIKE] must we use the past perfect since [STRIKE]weÂ’[/STRIKE] we are talking about people who have passed away?

- Charles Lindbergh has flown solo over the Atlantic Ocean. :cross:
- Thomas Edison has invented the light bulb we [STRIKE]used[/STRIKE] use today. :cross:

Corrections are greatly appreciated.

Lily

Welcome to the forum. :hi:

Please note my corrections above. You need to find the right key for an apostrophe on your keyboard.

The present perfect is used to express recent accomplishments. For example, on May 22nd, 1927, a newspaper might have reported "Charles Lindbergh has [successfully] flown solo across the Atlantic", but today, years after the accomplishment and after his death, we say "Charles Lindbergh flew solo across ... [in 1927]".
I can't think of any situation where the present perfect would be appropriate when talking about someone who is dead.

 

[GoesStation]

Re: English Grammar

I can't think of any situation where the present perfect would be appropriate when talking about someone who is dead.

Thomas Edison has sometimes been mentioned as a twentieth-century version of Elon Musk?

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: English Grammar

Thomas Edison has sometimes been mentioned as a twentieth-century version of Elon Musk?

OK, I will revise my statement. I can't think of a context when the active voice would work in the present perfect. As GoesStation has demonstrated, it works in the passive. GS's post does not refer, in the present perfect, to Edison's accomplishments.

 

[Rover_KE]

Lily, please note that I have changed your thread title.

Extract from the Posting Guidelines:

'Thread titles should include all or part of the word/phrase being discussed.'

 

[jutfrank]

My question is, can present perfect be used to describe dead people’s accomplishments?

As a rule, no. In fact, this fact is often exploited by teachers precisely as a way to teach the present perfect.

Or must we use past perfect since we're talking about people who have passed away?

Normally, the past simple is appropriate, not the past perfect. Of course, it all depends on context, though.

 

[Lilyoftheorient]

As a rule, no. In fact, this fact is often exploited by teachers precisely as a way to teach the present perfect.



Normally, the past simple is appropriate, not the past perfect. Of course, it all depends on context, though.

Hi,

Thanks so much. your explanation totally makes sense. I can see why it should be past simple because these people are no longer alive. Once again, your explanation is much appreciated.

Lily

 

[Lilyoftheorient]

Hi,

My original sentence#2: past perfect continuous tense

Jen had been living in NYC for 5 years when she met her boyfriend.

If revised to past perfect tense:

Jen had lived in NYC for 5 years when she met her boyfriend.

And the same question goes for this one:

We had had the car for ten years before it broke down. = past perfect tense

They had lived in France for ten years when they moved to England.

If revised to past perfect continuous tense:

We had been having the car for ten years before it broke down. = past perfect continuous (I think this sentence when used with PPC sounds a little strange. I’d rather use past perfect and I hope I’m right)

They had been living in France for ten years when they moved to England. = past perfect continuous

Are both sentences grammatically correct and still carried the same meaning when used with either past perfect continuous or past perfect?

Thanks so much for all the corrections from the experts. English is my second language and I want to speak and write perfect English.

Lily

 

[emsr2d2]

Hi,

My original sentence#2: past perfect continuous tense: Jen had been living in NYC for 5 years when she met her boyfriend.
If revised to past perfect tense: Jen had lived in NYC for 5 years when she met her boyfriend.
If you use "Jen had lived ...", it's not clear that she was living there when she met her boyfriend. All we know is that, when she met her boyfriend at an unspecified location, she had, at some point in the past, lived in New York.

And the same question goes for this one: We had had the car for ten years before it broke down. = past perfect tense

They had lived in France for ten years when they moved to England.

If revised to past perfect continuous tense:

We had been having the car for ten years before it broke down. = past perfect continuous (I think this sentence when used with PPC sounds a little strange. I’d rather use past perfect and I hope I’m right)

They had been living in France for ten years when they moved to England. = past perfect continuous

Are both sentences grammatically correct and still carried the same meaning when used with either past perfect continuous or past perfect?

The simple answer to this whole section is that we don't tend to use the verb "to have" in the continuous when talking about ownership.
I have a car. :tick:
I have had the car for ten years. :tick:
I had had the car for ten years when it broke down. :tick:
I am having a car. :cross:
I have been having the car for ten years. :cross:
I had been having the car for ten years when it broke down. :cross:

See above.

 

[Lilyoftheorient]

Hi, thanks so much for your explanations. The answer regarding the car ownership really makes sense. Also, I learned from an English grammar website that past perfect + stative verbs is can also be used to show that something started in the past and continues up until another time in the past.

* Jane had known her husband for ten years when they got married.
* They had been married for ten years when they had their first child.

The above sentences are my own. I hope they are grammatically correct.

Thanks for taking the time to help me with English grammar. I will have more questions coming.

Lily

 

[Lilyoftheorient]

Hi, I have a few questions on the usage of the verb “being”. These are my own sentences. Please let me know if my understanding of the grammatical structures is correct and please help correct my grammar mistakes if there’s any. Thank you.

1- Being an English teacher is interesting. —> being = subject, English teacher = subject complement

2- Do you like being a student? —> being = subject, a student = subject complement, like = verb

Could the below sentences be used interchangeably since they meant the same?

3- Being king Gustaf’s eldest daughter, princess Victoria is groomed to someday be queen.

- Victoria is known as the crowned princess, being that she’s king Gustaf’s eldest daughter.

4- Being daughter of the dethroned king, she lives in exile following the revolution.

- She lives in exile following the revolution, being that she’s the dethroned king’s daughter.

5- The child was punished by his mother for being naughty.

- Being naughty, the child was punished by his mother.

6- He’s being treated in the hospital after being found alive but seriously wounded in a combat.

7- Having being without money for quite a while, I’ve learned that life without money can be hard.

8- The garment looks ill fitted because the patterns were not being applied and the instructions were not being followed.

9- The professor demands that he attend class regularly to avoid being suspended from school.

10- The town mayor demanded that all residents be evacuated from their home immediately to avoid being killed by wildfires.

- The town mayor demanded that all residents evacuate their home immediately to avoid being killed by wildfires.

11- Being a careful, serious student, he checked if there were any mistakes before he handed in his work.

Note: I understand that even though his action is in the past, verb “being“ is being used in the present continuous because him being careful is a state of being. He did not stop being careful after that. Am I right?

12- Being a doctor is not at all an easy task.

Note: The verb “being” in the above sentence is a gerund and also subject of the sentence? Or is there a difference between “being” as subject and as gerund? How can I identify the difference when I see them?

I hope to see replies with corrections soon. Thanks so much for all the helpful advice from the English language experts. Much appreciated.

Lily

 

[Rover_KE]

Lily, please start a new thread for post #12 with the title Being a teacher is interesting.

I am closing this thread.