I was home at 2 a.m.

[Winwin2011]

If I got home at 2 a.m last night, is it possible to say 'I was home at 2 a.m last night'?

 

[Raymott]

If I got home at 2 a.m last night, is it possible to say 'I was home at 2 a.m last night'?

Had you entered the front door yet?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Yes, but they have different meanings. The first implies that you were not home before you got home. The second is just a statement of fact. Also, while many people would say "last night" to include 2 AM, it was technically "this morning".

 

[Winwin2011]

Had you entered the front door yet?

Yes, I had.

 

[Winwin2011]

https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/207312-When-reaching-home-can-we-say-quot-We-are-home-quot

Bhai said "when reaching home, we can say 'We are home"

 

[tzfujimino]

Are you trying to create an alibi, Winwin?
What did you do?

(Edit) Bhai said "when reaching home, we can say 'We are home"
Oh, I see.:-D

 

[Raymott]

Yes, I had.

Then I suggest that you were at home at 2am, and that you had reached home slightly prior to 2am.
In what context do want to use these phrases? For forensic reasons, you will not get off by claiming that you could not have killed someone in the house at 2am because you weren't at home then - because you had just reached home at 1.59am and hadn't yet entered the house.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I don't think the statement turns on whether the speaker went through the door. Had the speaker sat on the porch and had a cigarette or puttered in the garage, he/she would still have been home.

 

[Peter Chan]

Had you entered the front door yet?

I am not a teacher

You mean home limits only to the building inside which we eat, sleep, bathe, etc.,the area outside the building but within the bounbary wall is not part of home.

 

[Raymott]

I am not a teacher

You mean home limits only to the building inside which we eat, sleep, bathe, etc.,the area outside the building but within the bounbary wall is not part of home.

It varies. I can only speak from Australian experience. For a free-standing house and yard, 'home' would include the yard - anything inside the fence. In a block of apartments, you could possibly be half-way up the stairs and not be home yet.
But this is all hypothetical. We don't know how the concepts of time and place are to be practically applied. A certain application might need a specialist definition.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I think that is stretching the definition of home too far. If you are in or surrounding your premises, you are home. Nobody creates this fine a line.

 

[Raymott]

I think that is stretching the definition of home too far. If you are in or surrounding your premises, you are home. Nobody creates this fine a line.

That's what I just said. (The first bit). If you have a need to create a fine line between home and 'not home' you'd do so. But it would depend on the purpose. Don't you have neighbourhood disputes where you live, or land surveyors or property conveyancers? You are certainly not 'at home' if you are standing in your neighbour's yard, even if their yard surrounds your home. The police are another agency which has an interest in where one person's home ends and another begins.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I don't know what that has to do with the OP's question.

 

[Raymott]

I don't know what that has to do with the OP's question.

I assumed you were responding to my last post which immediately precedes yours, and to which your reply makes at least a bit of sense. You've already posted twice in this thread without mentioning that "Nobody creates this fine a line", so why would you wait til now to say that in reply to the OP.
No, I'm sure you were replying to me, in which case it's irrelevant whether it's related to the OP's question.

 

[MikeNewYork]

As far as I can recall, I was replying to Peter Chan's post. This is the second time tonight that you have mistakenly assumed that my reply has something to do with you. Calling my post irrelevant is insulting. And it was uncalled for. I suggest you take a chill pill. We are all on the same side.

 

[Raymott]

As far as I can recall, I was replying to Peter Chan's post.

You've been here long enough to know that if you post a reply, you need to give an indication of whose post it's to. If you post immediately under mine, with content that makes sense in reply to mine, how am I meant to know you're replying to someone a few posts back?

 

[MikeNewYork]

And you have been here long enough to know that you should read the threads before you go nuts. I am not responsible for what you assume. Get over yourself.