Results 1 to 2 of 2
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Russian
      • Home Country:
      • Russian Federation
      • Current Location:
      • Russian Federation

    • Join Date: Dec 2011
    • Posts: 176
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #1

    Using the past simple tense to express the duration of some action in the past.

    Hello.

    I wonder if there is any point to use either the past perfect continuous tense or the past perfect tense instead of the past simple tense in such a context as follows:

    "I've been to Argentina once and I lived there for six years".

    As far as I know, it's considered to be correct to use the past simple tense to show a duration which starts and stops in the past.

    On the other hand, I've heard another opinion:

    "I've been to Argentina once and I had been living (or 'had lived') there for six years".

    As it's been explained, the reason of using either of the perfect tenses is that there's an implicit time in the past when someone completed his/her residence in the country, and therefore, it seems to be reasonable. However, I'm not certain... Perhaps it's better to add something like "...before I left the country" if there's a strong desire to use the perfect tenses.

    Could anyone make it clear?

    Thank you in advance.
    Last edited by Weaver67; 07-Jun-2012 at 19:45.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2009
    • Posts: 3,505
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #2

    Re: Using the past simple tense to express the duration of some action in the past.

    Quote Originally Posted by Weaver67 View Post
    Hello.

    I wonder if there is any point to use either the past perfect continuous tense or the past perfect tense instead of the past simple tense in such a context as follows:

    "I've been to Argentina once and I lived there for six years".

    As far as I know, it's considered to be correct to use the past simple tense to show a duration which starts and stops in the past.

    On the other hand, I've heard another opinion:

    "I've been to Argentina once and I had been living (or 'had lived') there for six years".

    As it's been explained, the reason of using either of the perfect tenses is that there's an implicit time in the past when someone completed s/he residence in the country, and therefore, it seems to be reasonable. However, I'm not certain... Perhaps it's better to add something like "...before I left the country" if there's a strong desire to use the perfect tenses. I agree. It is expected to hear/read a "when", "before", "by the time" clause with past perfect continuous. And in your example, "I've been to Argentina once" is separate and distinct and not really relevant in terms of meaning to the second clause.
    Could anyone make it clear?

    Thank you in advance.
    b.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 27-Feb-2012, 02:26
  2. [Grammar] Past perfect tense and simple past tense
    By alfree in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-Feb-2012, 17:28
  3. simple past and past perfect tense
    By aysaa in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13-Jan-2012, 14:56
  4. [Grammar] past perfect tense and simple past tense
    By prianca.p4 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-Oct-2011, 19:09
  5. [Grammar] Simple past Tense,past continuous
    By ngocvy0802 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 27-Oct-2009, 13:39

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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