[Grammar] Is this sentence grammatically correct?

[loosu]

can we form a "past continuous sentences" like this
"I WAS BEING IN LONDON" instead of "i was living in London"
in the first sentence we substitute the word "BEING" instead of "LIVING"
basically "be" is the verb it gives the meaning of "exist in actuality" or "occupy a specified position"
so i think we can use "be" instead of "live"
"being" is the continuous form of "be"
"was" here is just a helping verb
so it seems "I WAS BEING IN LONDON" is grammatically correct and there is no logical offense if we use this sentence instead "i was living in London"
am i correct ?
please kelp me and thanks in advance. .

 

[probus]

"I was being in London" is incorrect.

Instead you can say "I was in London". That is not quite the same as "I was living in London", which indicates a more permanent presence there.

You said "there is no logical offense if we use this sentence instead". The relationship between logic and language is tenuous at best. I don't think you'll find logic very helpful in learning English.

 

[loosu]

i understand that , i was in London is correct and it is simple past tense. . .
and i was living in London is past continuous tense. . thats also correct . .
but when forming a past continuous tense can we replace the word living with being ?

"living" carries the same meaning if "being" . . .

so why can't we form a sentence like,
"I was being in London" ? ?

and in present perfect tense ,
"i have been in London" is correct . . .
then how we convert this sentence to past continuous tense ? ?

please help me . . .

 

[probus]

i understand that , i was in London is correct and it is simple past tense.
of the verb "to be"
. .
and i was living in London is past continuous tense. . thats also correct
"I was living in London" is correct, but it is not a tense of the verb to be. It is the past progressive tense of the verb "to live".
. .
but when forming a past continuous tense can we replace the word living with being ? No. When you use "to live" you cannot form a tense of "to be", and vice versa.

"living" carries the same meaning if "being" . . .
No it doesn't. And even if it did, they are still two distinct and different verbs, one regular and the other irregular. "To be" in this context means to exist, to occupy space, consume oxygen, think etc. "To live" is another verb with a different meaning. It means to have a flat or a house there, perhaps a job, in short to reside there.

so why can't we form a sentence like,
"I was being in London" ? ?
Because the past progressive tense of "to be" is "I was", not "I was being". "To be" is an irregular verb. You just have to memorize it. You cannot demand that it be logical, because it will defy you.

 

[loosu]

thanks a lot for you reply . . can you please clarify this ,

i have been in London - this is present perfect tense do you agree ?

i was in London - this is simple past tense do you agree ?

how can we change this sentence to past progressive tense ?

thanks in advance. . .

 

[5jj]

i have been in London - this is present perfect tense do you agree ? Yes
i was in London - this is simple past tense do you agree ? Yes

how can we change this sentence to past progressive tense ? You can't.

The verb BE is used in the past progressive only when it has a meaning similar to 'behave' - I was being a little silly when I said that.

As a pure state verb with a meaning similar to 'exist', BE is not used progressively.

ps. Please use a capital letter for the first person pronoun I.

 

[loosu]

thanks for your reply,
according to your reply,
are the following sentence correct ?

I was being a little busy when I was working at the shop

I will be being little sad if I fail the exam

please help me and thanks

 

[5jj]

I was [STRIKE]being[/STRIKE] a little busy when I was working at the shop

I will be [STRIKE]being[/STRIKE] a little sad if I fail the exam

These are not natural sentences.

You seemed determined to use BE in the past progressive, despite our pointing out that it is so used only in the sense of 'behave'.

The progressive form of state verbs, including BE, is possibly more acceptable in Indian English, but I am a speaker of BrE, probus of CanE; speakers of AmE. AusE and NZE will agree with us, I am sure.

 

[loosu]

now I have bit better understanding . .
but you quoted the following sentence was correct
"I was being a little silly when I said that." how come ?


so, are is these correct ?
"I was being a little silly when I was a child"
and
"I was being a little sad when I lost my pen"

please help me. .

 

[5jj]

now I have bit better understanding . .
but you quoted the following sentence was correct
"I was being a little silly when I said that." how come ?

so, are [STRIKE]is[/STRIKE] these correct ?
"I was being a little silly when I was a child" NO
and
"I was being a little sad when I lost my pen" NO

please help me. .

Frankly, loosu, the best way to help you is to advise you never to use progressive forms of BE.

 

[Tdol]

You can use it to show a temporary state of affairs- I am normally sensible, but I was being a little silly when I said that. When I was a child is a very different time frame.