I <'ve been> <was> in St. Petersburg. (I'm back at home now)

[Michaelll]

You've just returned home, and a neighbor you haven't seen in about four weeks knocks on the door. You open the door, and she asks "Where have you been? I haven't seen you around here in a long while!" In which tense should the answer be (considering you've already returned home)?

A: Where have you been? I haven't seen you around here in a long while!
1. I <'ve been> <was> in St. Petersburg.
2. I <'ve been> <was> on holiday.
3. I <'ve been> <was> on a business trip.

 

[5jj]

Either alternative is possible in each of your sentences, though the present perfect in the question might make a present perfect more likely in the response.

 

[Michaelll]

Either alternative is possible in each of your sentences, though the present perfect in the question might make a present perfect more likely in the response.

Thanks! I'd also like to ask if all of the four options below are possible in the same context.

A: Where have you been? I haven't seen you around here in a long while!
1/2. I <'ve been> <was> in St. Petersburg.
3/4. I <'ve been> <went> to St. Petersburg.

 

[5jj]

Yes.

 

[Michaelll]

Yes.

Thank you!

One more similar question. (I suppose I shouldn't start a new thread on this)
Suppose I'm in Minsk and I bump into an old English friend of mine and she says, "Hey, Misha! I haven't seen you for ages! Where have you been?", which of these should I choose as an answer (considering I haven't been living in Moscow since I moved to Minks two weeks ago)?

A: Hey, Misha! I haven't seen you for ages! Where have you been?
1. I've been living in Moscow.
2. I've lived in Moscow.
3. I lived in Moscow.

 

[Tarheel]

A: Misha! I haven't seen you in ages. Where have you been?
B: Moscow. I've been living in Moscow.

 

[emsr2d2]

Minks

Are you sure about that?

 

[Michaelll]

Are you sure about that?

Look at the other place in post #5.

Suppose I'm in Minsk and I bump into an old English friend of mine and she ...

By the way, I didn't know you were doing free proofreading here.

 

[jutfrank]

In which tense should the answer be (considering you've already returned home)?

Don't think in terms of 'should'. If the questioner is using present perfect, showing that she's thinking in a certain aspect, why would you not respond in the same aspect? Responding in a different aspect would not be 'wrong' but it would mean you've changed the aspect. Why?

A: Hey, Misha! I haven't seen you for ages! Where have you been?
1. I've been living in Moscow.
2. I've lived in Moscow.
3. I lived in Moscow.

The questioner asked where you've been (a question about location), so tell her where you've been.

I've been in Moscow.

 

[emsr2d2]

By the way, I didn't know you were doing free proofreading here.

I don't do free proofreading. I'm a proofreader but I charge for that. Here, it's called "correcting mistakes by learners".

 

[Michaelll]

Don't think in terms of 'should'. If the questioner is using present perfect, showing that she's thinking in a certain aspect, why would you not respond in the same aspect? Responding in a different aspect would not be 'wrong' but it would mean you've changed the aspect. Why?

To me, it's because "I've been living in Moscow for ten years (or so)" implies that I still live there, so to my mind, if I moved back to Minsk, I shouldn't say "I've been living in Moscow" because I stopped doing that (in that example context) two weeks ago.

Suppose I'm in Minsk and I bump into an old English friend of mine and she says, "Hey, Misha! I haven't seen you for ages! Where have you been?", which of these should I choose as an answer (considering (I haven't been living in Moscow since) I moved to Minsk two weeks ago)?

A: Hey, Misha! I haven't seen you for ages! Where have you been?
1. I've been living in Moscow.
2. I've lived in Moscow.
3. I lived in Moscow.

 

[5jj]

To me, it's because "I've been living in Moscow for ten years (or so)" implies that I still live there,

It doesn't necessarily. The emphasis is on the duration, not the continuation up to the moment of speaking.

so to my mind, if I moved back to Minsk, I shouldn't say "I've been living in Moscow" because I stopped doing that (in that example context) two weeks ago.

But you can say that. Two weeks ago is close enough to the present period for the present perfect progressive to make it relevant.

 

[jutfrank]

To me, it's because "I've been living in Moscow for ten years (or so)" implies that I still live there

It doesn't necessarily. The emphasis is on the duration, not the continuation up to the moment of speaking.

I think there's a communication problem here. It's important to distinguish what something implies and what something means. If you say I've been living in Moscow for ten years, it doesn't mean (sentence meaning) that you still live there, though it may well imply that.

if I moved back to Minsk, I shouldn't say "I've been living in Moscow" because I stopped doing that (in that example context) two weeks ago.

There may well be good cause for you to say that, even if you stopped living there two weeks ago. As 5jj says, two weeks ago is close enough in time to make it likely that there is still present relevance. In other words, two weeks ago is not too remote that it can't easily be imagined as 'now'.