Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressions?

Status
Not open for further replies.

moonlike

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
Iran
Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressions?

Hi
I'm kind of mixed-up. Could you help me please? There's a section in the book which mentions different time expression used in different cases. With no context, it was just written "for the previous few centuries" and mentioned that the underlined part refers to a time before. However, it occurred to me that if it's possible to replace the underlined part with the following terms as well?


  • For the last/previous few centuries

  • Over the last/previous few centuries

  • During the last/previous few centuries

  • Throughout the last/previous few centuries

Can we use them interchangeably?

Thanks a lot.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio


Can we use them interchangeably?

Thanks a lot.
'Last' and 'previous'? No.
"Last century" was the twentieth century.
"The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century. For example. "Shakespeare wrote Hamlet in 1603. Most of his plays were published in the previous century." That is, the 1500s.
The same applies to "next" and "following".
 

moonlike

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
Iran
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

'Last' and 'previous'? No.
"Last century" was the twentieth century.
"The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century. For example. "Shakespeare wrote Hamlet in 1603. Most of his plays were published in the previous century." That is, the 1500s.
The same applies to "next" and "following".


Thanks Raymott. I already know this one "The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century. For example. "Shakespeare wrote Hamlet in 1603. Most of his plays were published in the previous century." That is, the 1500s."
However, I wonder if it's possible to say "I've been beat over the last few days/over the previous few days". So you mean here just "over the previous few days" is right?

Thanks.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

Thanks Raymott. I already know this one "The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century. For example. "Shakespeare wrote Hamlet in 1603. Most of his plays were published in the previous century." That is, the 1500s."
However, I wonder if it's possible to say "I've been beat over the last few days/over the previous few days". So you mean here just "over the previous few days" is right?

Thanks.
If you've been beat, then now is the base time (since you're using a present tense - present perfect).
So, no, I mean the opposite - you only use "over the last few days".
With "over the previous few days", you'd need "I was beat", and you'd need to add a base time.

What do you mean by "I've been beat?"
 

emsr2d2

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

I think the use of "beat" here was supposed to mean "tired".

I'm beat = I'm absolutely exhausted.
I've been beat over the last few days = Over the last few days, I've been feeling absolutely exhausted.

I don't use it myself but I've heard it quite a lot, usually in AmE. It always sounds a little odd to me when used in a past tense sentence because, of course, I'm used to "beat" being a verb and therefore it should be "beaten". But here it's an adjective so it doesn't change construction.
 

moonlike

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
Iran
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

I think the use of "beat" here was supposed to mean "tired".

I'm beat = I'm absolutely exhausted.
I've been beat over the last few days = Over the last few days, I've been feeling absolutely exhausted.

I don't use it myself but I've heard it quite a lot, usually in AmE. It always sounds a little odd to me when used in a past tense sentence because, of course, I'm used to "beat" being a verb and therefore it should be "beaten". But here it's an adjective so it doesn't change construction.

Yeah. Thanks. I mean "exhausted". I've heard it in a serial. Could you kindly help me with my original question in the thread. I'm kind of confused. Why can we say "over the previous few centuries", but we can't say over the previous few days? And we should say "over the last few days"? Is there a rule here? Does it apply to over the previous few weeks/over the last few weeks? and hours and years as well?

Thanks a lot.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

Yeah. Thanks. I mean "exhausted". I've heard it in a serial. Could you kindly help me with my original question in the thread. I'm kind of confused. Why can we say "over the previous few centuries", but we can't say over the previous few days? And we should say "over the last few days"? Is there a rule here? Does it apply to over the previous few weeks/over the last few weeks? and hours and years as well?

Thanks a lot.
Raymott has already answered this. We can use 'last few days/weeks/centuries/etc' only if they end in the present day/week/century/etc. We use 'previous few days/etc' when they end in a day/etc before the present one.
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

Yeah. Thanks. I mean "exhausted". I've heard it in a serial. Could you kindly help me with my original question in the thread. I'm kind of confused. Why can we say "over the previous few centuries", but we can't say over the previous few days? And we should say "over the last few days"? Is there a rule here? Does it apply to over the previous few weeks/over the last few weeks? and hours and years as well?

Thanks a lot.

It depends on the context. I could say "Over the last few days" meaning the few days immediately before today. I could also say "I really felt ill last Thursday, I had been feeling a little unwell over the previous few days, but that was when it really hit me". Do you see the difference? In fact I wouldn't say either, I would use "for" rather than "over". Though "over" is possible.
 
Last edited:

moonlike

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
Iran
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

It depends on the context. I could say "Over the last few days" meaning the few days immediately before today. I could also say "I really felt ill last Thursday, I had been feeling a little unwell over the previous few days, but that was when it really hit me". In fact I wouldn't say either, I would use "for" rather than "over". Though "over" is possible. Do you see the difference?

Thanks bhai for the clear example you provided. Well "over" means throughout/during and for well. It's on the tip of my tongue!;-) Actually to be honest, no not exactly. I would really appreciate it if you shed more light on that please.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

Thanks bhai for the clear example you provided. Well "over" means throughout/during and for well. It's on the tip of my tongue!;-) Actually to be honest, no not exactly. I would really appreciate it if you shed more light on that please.
"Over" and "for" is not the issue. Nor is days/weeks/centuries... The same rule applies.
Now, in post #3, you said "
I already know this one "The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century."
But then you make the illogical leap to assuming
"
So you mean here just "
over the previous few days"is right?"

No, I meant "Only 'over the last few days' is right". Why should "the previous few days" not depend on the base day just the same as "the previous century"? (It does). "Previous" requires mention of a base time. For "last", the base time is now.
There should be no more explaining necessary if you read the thread carefully again.
 

moonlike

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
Persian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
Iran
Re: Can we replace "for the previous few centuries" with the following time expressio

"Over" and "for" is not the issue. Nor is days/weeks/centuries... The same rule applies.
Now, in post #3, you said "
I already know this one "The previous century" depends on what is given as the base century."
But then you make the illogical leap to assuming
"
So you mean here just "
over the previous few days"is right?"

No, I meant "Only 'over the last few days' is right". Why should "the previous few days" not depend on the base day just the same as "the previous century"? (It does). "Previous" requires mention of a base time. For "last", the base time is now.
There should be no more explaining necessary if you read the thread carefully again.


Thank you all. I got it clearly well.Because we don't have such clear-cut reason for their difference in my mother tongue, that's why I got kind of mixed-up at fist. Sorry for stretching the thread. However all your explanations were of great help to me.
:up:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top