# Thread: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

1. ## run 150 meters in 35 seconds

As I know, "In" in the future always means "after" not "within", so doesn't the underline have to be corrected to "within 35 seconds"? It sounds awkward to me.

mid3-1
ex)To be a soccer referee
- You must pass a lot of different tests. For example, if you are a woman, you should be able to run 150 meters in 35 seconds and repeat that ten times....

2. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

Originally Posted by keannu
As I know, "In" in the future always means "after" not "within", so doesn't the underline have to be corrected to "within 35 seconds"? It sounds awkward to me.

mid3-1
ex)To be a soccer referee
- You must pass a lot of different tests. For example, if you are a woman, you should be able to run 150 meters in 35 seconds and repeat that ten times....
The sentence is good. Where did you get the idea that " 'in' in the future always means 'after'"? It doesn't.

3. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

You mean "in" can be "within" as well in the future time? Like "in 35 seconds" can mean "20 sec, 30sec, or 32 sec"? I have never thought like that, so if what you said is true, I'll be really shocked.

4. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

To me, 35 seconds is the maximum- anything less would be better.

5. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

I'm not sure what other preposition you think you can use when talking about the length of time it takes to do something.

If you had not read the information in this thread, what preposition would you have put in the spaces below?

He ran 100 metres _____ 9.96 seconds.
At the Olympics, we think he will run 100 metres _______ 9.8 seconds.
She stuffed twenty tomatoes _______ three minutes.
I am going to stuff twenty tomatoes _______ two and a half minutes.
He is going to need to write all his university assignments _______ just two days!

6. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

I may sound silly, but I have always thought that for the future, "in" always means after, while "within" does "less than the time". So my idea about "in" was like this so far.
I think "He will run 100 meters within 9.8 seconds" means "He will run 100 meters in less than 9.8 seconds", so if "in" means either "after" or "less than", how can I tell which is which in any case? I'm quite confused that "in" can mean "less than" in the future.

1.He ran 100 metres __in___ 9.96 seconds.(past, could be less than or after)
2.At the Olympics, we think he will run 100 metres ___in__ 9.8 seconds.(future, after)
3.She stuffed twenty tomatoes __in___ three minutes.(past, after)

7. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

Originally Posted by keannu
how can I tell which is which in any case?
The same way everyone else, either native speaker or ESL speaker, does - from the context.

"I will fly to Buenos Aires in four weeks" obviously doesn't mean that it will take me four weeks to fly there.
"I will run 100 meters in 10 seconds" doesn't mean you're going to do in 10 seconds from now.

Besides, language doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. People don't say ambiguous sentences out of the blue then walk away leaving you to wonder what they meant. You ask them to clarify.

A: I'm driving to Sydney in one week.
B: Do you mean it will take you a week to get there?
A: No, I mean I'm leaving in a week's time.

If you see it written, you'll almost always be able to tell from the context.

8. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

Maybe if I'm not mistaken, we've been going in different directions. I didn't mean "in" in terms of "after from now on", maybe my choice of the term was wrong. It should have been "taking less than the time designated".
My original question was if "run 150 meters in 35 seconds" could mean "run 150 meters less than(within) 35 seconds like 10 sec, 25sec, 30 sec, etc" other than "taking exactly 35 seconds".
So does "in" mean either "for" or "less than=within" in the future time?

9. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

He ran 100 metres in 9.98 seconds - that is exactly how long it took him to run the distance.
He can run 100 metres in 9.98 seconds - he has the ability to do it that fast.
I think he will run 100 metres (or "do the hundred metres") in 9.97 seconds - I think that is the exact length of time he will do it in.
I think he will do the hundred metres in under 10 seconds - unspecific length of time but it will be less than 10 seconds.

When we talk about a race, if we say "in", the tense isn't important, it always means an exact length of time. If we're not sure, we would precede the length of time with "about" or "approximately".

I reckon Usain Bolt will do the hundred in 9.57 seconds at the London Olympics.
I think he'll run it in about 9.6.

We use "over", "in" and "under" for lots of timings.

I can drive to my parents' house in just under four hours.
He won the 100 metres in 9.67 seconds.
My train to work takes just over 35 minutes.

10. ## Re: run 150 meters in 35 seconds

Thanks a lot!!! My fundamental question was if "in" has any chance to denote "less than or under the time" in any case for the future. I'm asking this as the translation for "You should be able to run 150 meters in 35 seconds" is "less than(under=within)35 seconds" not "at exactly 35 seconds", and I think it's wrong, so I wonder if it can be applied to other "in" as well.

1)He will be back in an hour. = If it's 10pm, his coming will happen at 11pm,right? not at 10:30 or 10:20 or 10:59(if we don't consider time frame not strictly for 10:59)

2)The plane will arrive in two hours = It will take exactly two hours from the time we start to count till the arrival, not less than(within=under) two hours like 1hr 10min, 50min, etc, right?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•