Eat breakfast

[Ju]

1. I have already eaten breakfast.
2. I ate breakfast already.

May I know the differences in meaning between the above sentences?

 

[Rover_KE]

They mean the same to me.

 

[tedmc]

Sentence No.2 is not correct. The simple past tense does not go with "already".

 

[Skrej]

They're both fine to me in AmE, with no difference in meaning.

I'm possibly more likely to use the 2nd when responding to an offer for breakfast.

 

[jutfrank]

As others have pointed out, 2. is conspicuously typical of North American style. I wouldn't recommend using it, generally speaking (unless of course you want to sound like those Americans who do use it!).

Sentence 2 would generally be considered incorrect by teachers focusing on delivering English as an international language, as it goes against what we teach about aspect. If you use sentence 1, you'll always be right.

Both sentences mean the same thing in that they would both be used in the same situation to give the same information.

 

[Tarheel]

Abe: Do you want to get breakfast?
Bob: I already ate.

That would come natural to me.

(Ju, you have my permission to stop saying "May I know ..?")

 

[emsr2d2]

Whilst it's absolutely true that there are more speakers of AmE than BrE, I think it's still helpful for the OP to know that a BrE speaker hearing "I ate already/I already ate" would immediately know that the speaker is not a native speaker of BrE.

 

[GoesStation]

(Ju, you have my permission to stop saying "May I know ..?")

This is Tarheel's very delicate way of saying "Don't start a question with May I know? It's not natural to native speakers."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I think some speakers of AmE might not agree.

It seems fine to this American: "I already ate." "I ate already." "I already ate breakfast." "I ate breakfast already."

I thought I answered this one already . . . .

 

[jutfrank]

They would be rather narrow-minded if they felt that way. A form that is perfectly legitimate in AmE can hardly be considered incorrect in 'international English'. We Brits sometimes forget that AmE is spoken by rather more speakers than BrE. It is also the preferred form in some parts of the world where English is learnt as a second or foreign language.

Piscean, I fully expected you to say something like this. I wonder if you're deliberately misunderstanding what I mean by 'incorrect'. You know full well that in all your years of teaching learners to use the present perfect, the aim was to get them not to say I ate already, which is a dialectic variant, and not something we would consider target language when teaching standard grammar usage, no matter how natural it sounds to some. This goes for American teachers too—there are plenty of AmE speakers who use the perfect aspect in such utterances.

Your point about number of users is mistaken, I'm afraid. That has little bearing on what teachers tend to teach. The considered standard form of any language is not determined by number of speakers.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . there are plenty of AmE speakers who use the perfect aspect in such utterances. . . .

Sure. "I've eaten already" and "I ate already" mean the same thing.

Is "I ate already" structurally different than "I ate," "I ate this morning," or "I ate something"?

This is why I don't pose as a grammarian. I'd never get away with it.

 

[jutfrank]

Sure. "I've eaten already" and "I ate already" mean the same thing.

Right. They are both naturally used in the same way.

Is "I ate already" structurally different than "I ate," "I ate this morning," or "I ate something"?

Those are very different utterances, so I'm entirely not sure what you mean. Anyway, the structure is not relevant here—this is about usage. The quite-perfectly-correct-and-natural I ate already lacks perfect aspect. The perfect aspect (shown in I've eaten already) is what links the past action with the present moment. The utterance I ate this morning does not need such a link, as it's a simple statement of past events.

What we normally teach (and I really don't feel I should have to be justifying this, especially to retired EFL teachers) is that the word already, (along with other typical time expressions such as yet/still/only just, etc.) shows that the speaker has such a link in mind. When there is such a link, the present perfect is the preferred choice, as it shows the link in its aspect. I ate already, lacking such aspect, does not do that.

Of course, although I do understand that omitting the aspect in I ate already sounds fine for many AmE speakers, I would question whether such an omission in other utterances also does.

Imagine Karen Carpenter, for instance, crooning "We only just be-gaaaan ..."

 

[GoesStation]

You know full well that in all your years of teaching learners to use the present perfect, the aim was to get them not to say I ate already, which is a dialectic variant, and not something we would consider target language when teaching standard grammar usage, no matter how natural it sounds to some. This goes for American teachers too—there are plenty of AmE speakers who use the perfect aspect in such utterances.

I hope American teachers accept either variant equally. Americans use both.

 

[jutfrank]

it's still helpful for the OP to know that a BrE speaker hearing "I ate already/I already ate" would immediately know that the speaker is not a native speaker of BrE.

It's not so much that it's marks a speaker as a non-native BrE speaker, it's that it marks the speaker out as speaking a form of AmE. That's my point—it's specific to American English, originally at least.

 

[jutfrank]

I hope American teachers accept either variant equally.

Why? What do you mean by 'accept either variant equally'?

Look, I'm going to push this point because I really feel that people are misunderstanding what I mean. I'm talking about what teachers teach, not what they accept, (whatever that might mean).

 

[GoesStation]

Why? What do you mean by 'accept either variant equally'?

I'd expect an American teacher to find other examples to teach the present perfect. I can't imagine that many American teachers are aware that "I already ate" sounds odd to anyone. There are plenty of cases where only the perfect aspect is natural in American English where the simple aspect is less so. I've just thought of one example which I've used twice in this sentence.

 

[emsr2d2]

It's not so much that it's marks a speaker as a non-native BrE speaker, it's that it marks the speaker out as speaking a form of AmE. That's my point—it's specific to American English, originally at least.

In my previous post, I was going to say that it would mark the speaker out as using AmE but I didn't know whether the past simple with "already" was widely used in any other variants. The only thing I could say with almost complete confidence was that a native BrE speaker would assume the speaker was not brought up in the UK within a BrE-speaking environment. Of course, it's possible that that person was brought up in that environment and then, for some reason, later in life started using the past simple.

 

[jutfrank]

You appear to be suggesting is that the perfect aspect is the natural choice with such words as 'already'.

No.

It is - in BrE; it is not is some other varieties.

Which ones?

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER


Hi, Ju:

According to the Grammar Book An ESL/EFL TEACHER'S COURSE (1983 edition), page 73, by Marianne Celce-Murcia and Diane Larsen-Freeman, "In informal American English," the "simple past rather than the present perfect" often occurs with certain adverbs.

They give these three examples:

1. "Yes, she (has) just finished it."
2. "No, she hasn't finished it yet." [My note: Americans might say, "No, she didn't finish it yet."]
3. "Yes, she (has) already filed it."

*****

In my opinion:

FORMAL OCCASION


Your manager: Ju, I would like to invite you to have breakfast with me now.
Ju: Thank you very much, sir. But I have already eaten breakfast and have to prepare to meet one of our important clients.

INFORMAL OCCASION

Mona: Hi, Ju. I'm on my way to the caf[eteria] for breakfast. [Do you] wanna join me?
Ju: Love to, Mona. But I already ate [breakfast]. gotta get to the library to finish a report for my history prof[essor].

 

[jutfrank]

Thank you for your comment, The Parser.

Explaining the difference as one of formality is in my opinion entirely reasonable. Your distinction between formal/informal is basically the same distinction I'm making between standard/non-standard.

I'd like to point out again that this distinction is not one of naturalness/unnaturalness. Both forms would be natural in their right places.