"I am living" when it is not used to refer to your hometown

[Rachel Adams]

Would a native speaker say "I am living in Berlin" instead of "I live in Berlin" if it's not their hometown and they have been living there for 30 years and they are still living there?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Would a native speaker say "I am living in Berlin" instead of "I live in Berlin" if it's not their hometown and they have been living there for thirty years and they are still living there?

It doesn't matter whether it's their hometown. Neither one implies that. I live in Augusta, Maine, USA, but it's not my hometown.

The two sentences mean almost the same thing, but "I am living in Berlin" implies that it is temporary: "I live in Berlin now, but I move around a lot."

 

[Rachel Adams]

It doesn't matter whether it's their hometown. Neither one implies that. I live in Augusta, Maine, USA, but it's not my hometown.

They two sentences mean almost the same thing, but "I am living in Berlin" implies that it is temporary: "I live in Berlin now, but I move around a lot."

From one of the discussions I remember that both tenses are used but as far as I remember, the native speaker wasn't talking about their hometown. I don't know myself where this assumption comes from, but I was 100% sure a native speaker wouldn't say "I am living in Berlin" if it's not a temporary action or limited duration but a fact. I have always lived here and I am not going to move anywhere else. Can the present simple be replaced by the present progressive in "I live in Berlin" if it's neither temporary nor limited duration but a fact?

I found something in my notes that "even if the action isn't temporary it's not wrong to use the progressive as in I am living in x." The x is not a hometown. Yes, it doesn't matter but I am not asking about it I am asking if in "I live in Berlin" in my hometown and it's a permanent action I can say "I am living". I will try to find that discussion if it's necessary.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I just meant that "I am living" connotes a more temporary situation. Whether it's your hometown isn't the issue.

The grammar is fine either way. Your question was just about what a native speaker would say. That's what I was responding to.

No, it's not necessary to find that discussion.

 

[alexanderfinn]

It is a matter of individual perception. Maybe after 20 years you still feel like it is temporary. I think the verb 'live' contains an element of permanence however, and for the shorter term perhaps 'I am staying in Berlin' is more like a temporary home.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

It is a matter of individual perception. Maybe after 20 years you still feel like it is temporary. I think the verb 'live' contains an element of permanence however, and for the shorter term perhaps 'I am staying in Berlin' is more like a temporary home.

Right. That's why I made clear that there's not a hard rule.

Rachel, "staying" means it's not a residence. It means you're in a hotel or motel or a guest in someone's home.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Right. That's why I made clear that there's not a hard rule.

Rachel, "staying" means it's not a residence. It means you're in a hotel or motel or a guest in someone's home.

I am sorry if my previous thread is unclear. I wrote once again.
Thank you for taking time and answering again.
I read on one of the forums that a native speaker may use both the present simple and the progressive interchangeably in a sentence like "I am living in Dublin" instead of "I live in Dublin" even if the action isn't a temporary one. The progressive can also imply that the speaker was living somewhere else before. The native speaker wasn't talking about his hometown though. But if they were talking about their hometown would they still use the progressive and say "I am living" instead of "I live in Dublin" even if the action isn't temporary and the speaker didn't live anywhere else before? Aren't we talking about a fact in this case?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I am sorry if my previous thread is unclear. I wrote once again.
Thank you for taking time and answering again.
I read on one of the forums that a native speaker may use both the present simple and the progressive interchangeably in a sentence like "I am living in Dublin" instead of "I live in Dublin" even if the action isn't a temporary one.

Yes. Both are grammatical and natural, and both say where you live.

The progressive can also imply that the speaker was living somewhere else before.

Yes. So can the simple present. Either way, you might have lived elsewhere.

The native speaker wasn't talking about his hometown though.

Right. Neither tense implies that.

But if they were talking about their hometown would they still use the progressive and say "I am living" instead of "I live in Dublin"

No, probably not. But it wouldn't be incorrect. Context and preference matter.

If you asked me where I LIVE, I might say, "I LIVE in Augusta."

If you asked me where I'M LIVING, I might say, "I'M LIVING in Augusta."

If you asked me what my hometown is, I would not say Augusta. Hometown does not matter.

even if the action isn't temporary and the speaker didn't live anywhere else before? Aren't we talking about a fact in this case?

The fact remains the same either way: You now live in Dublin. You are now living in Dublin.

If you live in Dublin, then you're living in Dublin. If you're living in Dublin, then you live in Dublin.

So, to review:

- "I am living" is MORE LIKELY to mean a temporary situation.

- "I live" is MORE LIKELY to mean a continuing, stable situation.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Let's get two little things out of the way first:

1. I have changed Berlin to London; it's unlikely that a native speaker of English would live their whole life in the capital of Germany.
2. don't use 'fact' to contrast with 'temporary/limited duration.


One of my relations was born in London, lived there all her life, and died there. She did not travel away from London until she was about thirty. After that she came to Hampshire for one week a year, staying at home in London the remaining fifty-one weeks. It is extremely unlikely that she ever said "I am living in London"; the natural way to speak of her place of residence was "I live in London".

I am speaking about a native speaker of English who moved abroad and isn't going to relocate anywhere else. Or a native speaker of French who moved to London.
If the progressive is not impossible in sentences such as "I am living in Berlin" where the speaker is not talking about a temporary action because he is not going to move anywhere and Berlin is not his hometown. Would the same native speaker use "I am living" to refer to an action which isn't temporary and to refer to his place of residence? If I understand correctly the answer is "no!" because that wouldn't be natural.

 

[Rachel Adams]

So, to review:

- "I am living" is MORE LIKELY to mean a temporary situation.

- "I live" is MORE LIKELY to mean a continuing, stable situation.

Thank you!!! Two things I didn't know. First that the present simple can also imply that the speaker lived somewhere else before. "I am living in Berlin." Suggests that wasn't always the case and even "I live in Berlin" can suggest the same idea.
In answer to my question:
"But if they were talking about their hometown would they still use the progressive and say "I am living" instead of "I live in Dublin"
You said:

"No, probably not. But it wouldn't be incorrect. Context and preference matter."

Do you mean "I am living" is correct as an answer to the question "where are you living?" if the question is asked in the progressive otherwise only the present simple is natural?

 

[Rachel Adams]

You are looking for absolute answers when there aren't any Rachel. In post #9, Charlie used the words 'is more likely to mean', not 'definitely means'. In apparently identical situations, one speaker may say 'I live' another 'I am living'; the next day, the first person may say 'I am living' and the second 'I live'. We don't plan out the tenses and aspects we are going to use.

Yes, I must accept that there are no absolute rules in English. I understand that in "I am living" the progressive is likely to mean a temporary action" however you said in your example about your relative that using progressive would be unnatural in the context you were talking about because you mentioned a place of residence which as I understand suggests a stable situation. So perhaps whether it's a hometown or not still matters? Just a very humble opinion of a non-native speaker to understand English grammar better. I really wonder what you think about it because when you said it's unnatural perhaps it doesn't matter it's impossible?

 

[GoesStation]

Two things I didn't know. First, that the present simple can also imply that the speaker lived somewhere else before. "I am living in Berlin" [no period] suggests that wasn't always the case and even "I live in Berlin" can suggest the same idea.

The present simple doesn't "imply" that. It can be used whether or not the speaker has always lived there.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

The most important thing is that this is a minor, minor point and not worth fussing over. Both are grammatical. Both say where you live. The rest you can sort out just by listening to people.

If you're still confused about this in five years, ask us again then.

 

[Rachel Adams]

The most important thing is that this is a minor, minor point and not worth fussing over. Both are grammatical. Both say where you live. The rest you can sort out just by listening to people.

If you're still confused about this in five years, ask us again then.

One more question. Regarding one's place of residence. I am still thinking about Piscean's example... The natural way to refer to it is "I live" as Piscean explained. In this context is it the same for both AmE and BrE speakers? No matter what I consider my hometown whether it's the town in which I was born or the place in which I have spent a significant part of my life isn't "I live in London" the most natural and common way to say that it's my permanent residence? I may have lived somewhere else but I am not moving anywhere else. Now it's my permanent residence.

 

[GoesStation]

No matter what I consider my hometown whether it's the town in which I was born or the place in which I have spent a significant part of my life [STRIKE]isn't[/STRIKE] is "I live in London" the most natural and common way to say that it's my permanent residence?

Yes.