present result

[Kudla]

Hi,
I have been wondering if sentences in which no present state is visible can express present result (depending on context), eg:

I have said so
I have given you proof
I have stood your guarantee
He has doubtles informed you that...
Your Highness has permitted me to...

or do they have to be regarded as perfect of experience?
Thank you

 

[5jj]

If you understand that the use of the present perfect is natural and correct in such utterances, does it really matter what labels you apply?

 

[Kudla]

Well, it kind of does as it has to do with the corpus I am trying to put together. So if you wouldn´t mind could you help me with this?
Thanks

 

[Raymott]

Hi,
I have been wondering if sentences in which no present state is visible can express present result (depending on context), eg:

I have said so
I have given you proof
I have stood your guarantee
He has doubtles informed you that...
Your Highness has permitted me to...

or do they have to be regarded as perfect of experience?
Thank you

In general, the present perfect is a present tense. So, if I said, "I've closed the door", it's generally inferrable that, at the time of speaking, the door is closed.

But there are obvious exceptions, so you cannot make this a general rule. (Someone might have opened the door between the time I closed it, and the time I said that sentence).

So, the answer to your question is "They can express a present state, but they don't do so of logically necessity."

 

[Kudla]

Thanks a lot. As for the exceptions I am aware of something like that but what I would primarily like to know is whether you as native speakers percieve a sentence like I HAVE SAID SO as rather referring to a present state, e.g. YOU KNOW IT or to a past action that was performed (once you say something you can´t take it back), e.g. I ALREADY DID IT
- considering that I HAVE SAID SO is an answer to someone who doesn´t believe you to be down and out
Thank you!

 

[5jj]

I find that question almost impossible to answer. Once I start analysing my own utterances, I begin to lose confidence in my ability to do so.

I think that when I say 'I have (already) told you', my personal equivalent of 'I have said so', my brain is blending the ideas of 'I told you' (past) and 'you should know' (present).

 

[e2e4]

/A learner/

I have read a book, had a bath and got to bed afterwards. After two hours of sleeping I woke and got up.

I see the present perfect as the only verb aspect which links the past and the rest. It tells us what in the past caused the result, either single or accumulated, at the end of it.

 

[5jj]

I have read a book, had a bath and got to bed afterwards. After two hours of sleep(ing) I woke up and got up.

I see the present perfect as the only verb aspect which links the past and the rest. It tells us what in the past caused the result, either single or accumulated, at the end of it.

Your example, however, is not normal English, assuming that had and got are intended as past participles, resulting in three present perfect forms.

The natural English would be to use the past simple for all the verbs here; the past perfect would be possible for the three I have underlined.

It would be more natural to go rather than to get to bed in that sentence.

 

[Kudla]

Hi,
Is it true that you can say something like:

I have been to Paris, (I have) graduated and (I have) got a job - where all the verb phrases are in the present perfect? (Under the condition that those actions don´t show the sequence of events but just your achievements) and you therefore can´t use temporal adverbials like then, after that and so on?
Thanks

 

[e2e4]

I don't understand why this below wouldn't be correct

A: Have you been to any of big European cities, this year?
B: I've been to Paris. I've been to London. I've been to Moscow.

 

[RonBee]

I have been to Paris, I have graduated, and I have got a job.
​

.
That is certainly possible. But it does seem like something has been left out. (Graduated from what?) Certainly, after "I have been to Paris" you can't use "then" or "after that" or whatever. You can, of course, say something like, "After my trip to Paris I finished my senior year at XYZ University."

 

[Raymott]

Hi,
Is it true that you can say something like:

I have been to Paris, (I have) graduated and (I have) got a job - where all the verb phrases are in the present perfect? (Under the condition that those actions don´t show the sequence of events but just your achievements) and you therefore can´t use temporal adverbials like then, after that and so on?
Thanks

I'm not 100% sure of what you're asking (and I suppose nor are the others).
Yes, with the present perfect, you're talking about the present, or at least your understand of the present. So, "I've been to Paris" means "Now, I am in the state of having been to Paris at some time". But the time isn't relevant because it doesn't change the present fact that you've been there.

 

[e2e4]

/A learner/

Kudla, I mostly consider the PP and the PP Continuous as

The result aspect
The result&way aspect continuous


They both start at a moment in the past and grow to the end of it.
After the past, in which they have been born, dies, they usually die as well leaving their children (results caused by them) to the listeners to take care about them.
The most natural verb aspects.
;-)

 

[Kudla]

"After the past, in which they have been born, dies, they usually die as well leaving their children (results caused by them) to the listeners to take care about them."
- I wonder what do you mean by that. Could you possibly provide me with an illustrative example to enlighten me about your statement.
FYI the PP is the tense taht grammarians devote more time than to the others and though its usage may look easy, there lots of puzzles yet to be solved. BTW many grammarians even argue that the PP is in fact a tense, not aspect

 

[5jj]

BTW many grammarians even argue that the PP is in fact a tense, not an aspect

I think that that is a subject best left for another thread!

A thought: it's probably more helpful when discussing tense (or aspect) to write the names in full. PP could be present perfect, past participle, past perfect or even present or past progressive.

 

[e2e4]

/A learner/

OK, my fault.:x-mas:
fivejedjon, of all those you mentioned (the the is forgotten, I think. If not, please explain), only the present perfect was mentioned in the thread. Then the PP must mean the present perfect only.
I think.
?

Thanks

 

[5jj]

the 'the' is forgotten, I think. If not, please explain.
PP = present perfect, etc, not the present perfect.

only the present perfect was mentioned in the thread. Then the PP must mean the present perfect only.

I did say, "A thought" - i.e. a suggestion.

For people reading only this thread, your abbreviation is almost certainly not a problem. However, some people browse through threads, and it could be more helpful, in my opinion, if such abbreviations were avoided. I would make the same comment to members on other threads.

 

[Pokemon]

So, "I've been to Paris" means "Now, I am in the state of having been to Paris at some time".

I can't make my mind process this idea. If a ship has sunk, now it is sunk; if the the door has been closed, now it is closed; if I've come to Paris, now I'm in Paris. These things I understand, but if I've been to Paris, how can I describe my current state as having been to Paris? I'd rather say that now I'm in the state of having returned from Paris. However that doesn't explain the use of present perfect in 'I have been to Paris'. I'd suggest the following explanation: "The period of time during which the action has taken place isn't over yet' (the speaker is alive). Otherwise past simple would have been used. "(X), who lived in the 19th century, visited (was in) Paris many times."

 

[5jj]

, how can I describe my current state as having been to Paris? I'd rather say that now I'm in the state of having returned from Paris. However that doesn't explain the use of present perfect in 'I have been to Paris'.

This is not so much a problem with the present perfect as with the idiomatic use of I have been to.

I have been to has very roughly the same meaning as I have visited.

 

[Pokemon]

This is not so much a problem with the present perfect as with the idiomatic use of I have been to.

I have been to has very roughly the same meaning as I have visited.

What I'm driving at is that the idea of a resultant state associated with the present perfect isn't sometimes articulate. For example, "I've seen X today". Probably, Raymott will interpret it as "I'm in the state of having seen X today"; but, as I said, my mind refuses to process such prose. For this type of use of the present perfect I suggest the definition given in my previous post.