She has been in London. So here English has got better and better.

[tufguy]

She has been in London. So here English has got better and better.

She has been to London means she has come back from London.

She has been in London for six months means she went there six months ago and she is still there.

If we use "She has been in London" without "Since" and "For" does it still mean the same?

Please check.

 

[emsr2d2]

She has been in London. So [strike]here[/strike] her English has got better and better. You have made two sentences from what should be one sentence.

"She has been to London" means she has come back from London.

"She has been in London for six months" means she went there six months ago and she is still there.

If we use "She has been in London" without "since" and "for", does it still mean the same?

Please check.

See my comments and corrections above.

"She has been in London" is possible as a standalone sentence.

- Where has Sarah been this week?
- She's been in London.

 

[tufguy]

See my comments and corrections above.

"She has been in London" is possible as a standalone sentence.

- Where has Sarah been this week?
- She's been in London.

So it means "She is still in London". Am I correct?

 

[emsr2d2]

No, not necessarily.

Where have you been this week?
I've been to London, Manchester and Glasgow. It was a busy week!

Clearly the speaker can't still be in all three of them. They're not necessarily still in any of them. They are just three places that person has been in the last week.

 

[tufguy]

No, not necessarily.

Where have you been this week?
I've been to London, Manchester and Glasgow. It was a busy week!

Clearly the speaker can't still be in all three of them. They're not necessarily still in any of them. They are just three places that person has been in the last week.

Okay, when we say "She has been to London" it means she has come back from london. If we say "She has been in London" either it can mean she is still there or has come back from there.

I am still confused could you please tell me what is the way to differentiate between these two? I have seen when we say "I have been to somewhere" it means that I was there but I am not there anymore. I have also seen this "I have been to London for the first time or second time" or "This is the first time I have been to London" which means that person is still there that person is saying that they have come to London for the first time or second time Am I correct?

"She has been in London" it also has two meanings either the person is still there or has come back. It can be used as "She have been to London" as well.

I got more confused about these expressions than earlier. Sorry guys but could you please explain me again?

 

[Tdol]

The context will tell you. If you're still not sure, ask for clarification. Asking if the person is back will normally clear things up- it's what we do when things aren't clear. If the person is standing in Oxford Street and says that it is the first time they have been to London, then it is clear.

 

[Tdol]

"I have been to somewhere"

If you want to use somewhere after this verb, don't use to.

 

[tufguy]

The context will tell you. If you're still not sure, ask for clarification. Asking if the person is back will normally clear things up- it's what we do when things aren't clear. If the person is standing in Oxford Street and says that it is the first time they have been to London, then it is clear.

So it all depends on context. It is very confusing for me.

 

[Tdol]

Putting words under a grammatical microscope is rarely as effective as looking at the speaker. Tenses are not perfect.