[Grammar] I've been reading this book for an hour.

[kadioguy]

I suggest you start a fresh thread with one of those sentences and ask for comments. When that has been dealt with, move on to another sentence.

https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/t...ce-a-month-ago

So I am posting this new thread with just four sentences below:

a. I've read this book since an hour ago.
b. I've read this book for an hour.
c. I've been reading this book since an hour ago.
d. I've been reading this book for an hour.
----------

Could you tell me which ones are incorrect or unnatural?

Could you tell me the reason?

 

[J&K Tutoring]

a. unnatural: Best understanding is that you started and finished it within the past hour.
b. natural, but meaningless: At some time in the past, you picked up this book, read for one hour, and put it down. So what?
c. incorrect and unnatural
d. correct and natural- a good sentence!

 

[kadioguy]

c. incorrect and unnatural

He has been here since five weeks ago. --->correct and natural.
(https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/258745-I-ve-sold-the-car—a-month-ago)

I've been reading this book since an hour ago. ---->incorrect and unnatural.
(I want to mean 'I was reading this book an hour ago, and I am still reading it now'.)
----------
Could you tell me why?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

He has been here since five weeks ago. --->correct and natural. . . .

I've been reading this book since an hour ago. ---->incorrect and unnatural.

(I want to mean 'I was reading this book an hour ago, and I am still reading it now'.)
----------
Could you tell me why?

It's grammatical and makes sense, but it's too convoluted to sound natural. We'd simply say I've been reading this book for an hour.

Likewise, we wouldn't say He has been here since five weeks ago. We'd say something like He's been here for five weeks.

 

[kadioguy]

That link does not take us to the words you quoted.

I might have said the following:

He has been here since five weeks ago. --->OK.

 

[kadioguy]

b. natural, but meaningless: At some time in the past, you picked up this book, read for one hour, and put it down. So what?

b. I've read this book for an hour.
---------
what does this sentence mean?

1. I started reading this book an hour ago. Now I've read this book for an hour.
2. At some time in the past, I picked up this book, read for one hour, and put it down. (as J&K Tutoring said)
3. Both are possible. It depends on context.

 

[GoesStation]

b. I've read this book for an hour.

The present perfect isn't natural there.

 

[kadioguy]

The present perfect isn't natural there.

If you don't mind, could you tell me more? (J&K Tutoring said it is natural but meaningless)

 

[kadioguy]

b. I've read this book for an hour.
---------
what does this sentence mean?

1. I started reading this book an hour ago. Now I've read this book for an hour.
2. At some time in the past, I picked up this book, read for one hour, and put it down. (as J&K Tutoring said)
3. Both are possible. It depends on context.

Now I would think it is (1).

 

[tedmc]

At any point in time, you could be in one of these three stages:

You have not read the book.
You are reading the book.
You have read the book.

So you do not say "you have read the book for an hour". "Have read" is a "state" and not a continuously process which can last one hour.

 

[kadioguy]

At any point in time, you could be in one of these three stages:

You have not read the book.
You are reading the book.
You have read the book.

So you do not say "you have read the book for an hour". "Have read" is a "state" and not a continuously process which can last one hour.

We don't say "I have read the book for an hour", but we can say "I have lived here for one year".

Why? :shock:

 

[tedmc]

"Live" is a process. "Have read" is a state.

 

[kadioguy]

At any point in time, you could be in one of these three stages:

You have not read the book.
You are reading the book.
You have read the book.

So you do not say "you have read the book for an hour". "Have read" is a "state" and not a continuously process which can last one hour.

After reading your post, my friend told me the following:

https://clyp.it/ldcsskmu

 

[Rover_KE]

What's your point? The guy talking there is not making sense.

 

[kadioguy]

What's your point? The guy talking there is not making sense.

tedmc said 'you do not say "you have read the book for an hour". "Have read" is a "state" and not a continuously process which can last one hour.'

So I gave tedmc's opinion to my friend, who is an English teacher, and he told me post #14.

I just want to know whether "I have read the book for an hour" is correct or natural.
Could you tell me? Could you tell me the reason? :-|

 

[emsr2d2]

There is no situation in which "I have read the book for one hour" would be required, no matter how grammatically correct it is.

If you're still reading, you need "I have been reading the book for one hour".
If you read the book at some time in the past, whether it's this morning or last night or last week, but are not currently reading it, you need "I read the book for one hour" (NB - read = past simple form, not present simple).
If you picked it up once in your entire life, read for one hour before stopping, and never picked it up again, you need "I read the book for one hour" (NB - read = simple past form, not present simple).

We simply do not use the present perfect "I have read" with a time period.

I have read this book. :tick:
I have read this book twice. :tick:
I have read this book on the beach, on a plane and on a bus. :tick:

I have read this book for one hour. :cross:
I have read this book for two minutes. :cross:
I have read this book for 15 years. :cross:

 

[kadioguy]

If you read the book at some time in the past, whether it's this morning or last night or last week, but are not currently reading it, you need "I read the book for one hour" (NB - read = past simple form, not present simple).

If you picked it up once in your entire life, read for one hour before stopping, and never picked it up again, you need "I read the book for one hour" (NB - read = simple past form, not present simple).

Pardon me, but the two sentences in red are the same. Is anything wrong?

 

[bhaisahab]

No, nothing is wrong.

 

[kadioguy]

No, nothing is wrong.

But I think emsr2d2 should have said:

If you read the book at some time in the past, whether it's this morning or last night or last week, but are not currently reading it, you need "I read the book (omitted 'for one hour')" (NB - read = past simple form, not present simple).

If you picked it up once in your entire life, read for one hour before stopping, and never picked it up again, you need "I read the book for one hour" (NB - read = simple past form, not present simple).

 

[bhaisahab]

'I read the book for one hour' works in both cases.