[Grammar] I've written a letter since lunchtime.

[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 written a letter since lunchtime.
b. I've written a letter for an hour.
c. I've written six letters since lunchtime.
d. I've written six letters for an hour.
---------
Could you tell me which ones are incorrect or unnatural?

Could you tell me the reason?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

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 written a letter since lunchtime. That's grammatical, but "I wrote a letter after lunch" would be more natural.
b. I've written a letter for an hour. That's grammatical, but "I've been writing a letter for an hour" would be more natural.
c. I've written six letters since lunchtime. That's fine.
d. I've written six letters for an hour. That makes no sense. You can't write six letters at the same time. You can write six letter in an hour, but you can't write six for an hour.
---------
Could you tell me which ones are incorrect or unnatural?

Could you tell me the reason?

In general, the more simply you say something, the more natural it will sound.

 

[Tarheel]

First, the third one (c) is the most natural. For a, I suggest:

I wrote a letter this afternoon.

For b, I suggest:

It took an hour for me to write that letter.

For d, I suggest:

I wrote six letters in an hour.

(Cross-posted with Charlie.)

 

[kadioguy]

In general, the more simply you say something, the more natural it will sound.

a. I've written a letter since lunchtime ---> That's grammatical, but "I wrote a letter after lunch" would be more natural.

c. I've written six letters since lunchtime. ---->That's fine.
-------
Why? This is because 'a letter' is too few. Am I right?

d. I've written six letters for an hour. That makes no sense. You can't write six letters at the same time. You can write six letter in an hour, but you can't write six for an hour.

'I've written six letters in an hour.'
'I've been writing six letters in an hour.'

Are these better?

(Cross-posted with Tarheel.)

 

[bhaisahab]

The first one is fine. The second one is not natural.

 

[Tarheel]

Try:

I've been writing letters for an hour.

 

[Tarheel]

"I've written six letters" suggests that you're not finished. You're still writing letters.

 

[kadioguy]

The first one is fine. The second one is not natural.

Pardon me, but what do your first one and second one refer to respectively?
(There are too many sentences. :shock:)

 

[kadioguy]

"I've written six letters" suggests that you're not finished. You're still writing letters.

Doesn't "I've written six letters" mean "I wrote six letters"? :shock:

 

[Tarheel]

Doesn't "I've written six letters" mean "I wrote six letters"? :shock:

No. There is a reason we say the two things differently. They mean different things.

"I wrote six letters" = I wrote letters. Six.
"I have written six letters" = Six letters were written by me, and I am still writing letters.

 

[kadioguy]

Try:
I've been writing letters for an hour.

Is this sentence used to replace 'I've written six letters for an hour.'?
-----------
(update)

Now I would think this sentence is used to replace 'I've been writing six letters in an hour.' Am I right?

 

[bhaisahab]

Pardon me, but what do your first one and second one refer to respectively?
(There are too many sentences. :shock:)

I was referring to these two:
'I've written six letters in an hour.'
'I've been writing six letters in an hour.'

 

[GoesStation]

"I wrote six letters" = I wrote letters. Six.
"I have written six letters" = Six letters were written by me, and I am still writing letters.

The second does not mean that to me. Suppose you just finished the sixth letter, and you hand them to your assistant. You could very naturally say I've written six letters. Will you mail ("post" in BrE) them for me?

 

[GoesStation]

The second does not mean that to me. Suppose you just finished the sixth letter, and you hand them to your assistant. You could very naturally say I've written six letters. Will you mail ("post" in BrE) them for me?

Or in a different context, you might say I've piloted eight kinds of airplanes. This by no means suggests you're currently in the cockpit; you could (like me) be sitting in your office, typing a message on a web forum.

 

[jutfrank]

"I have written six letters" = Six letters were written by me, and I am still writing letters.

Well, it could mean that but we would need more context to know whether it does mean that.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Doesn't "I've written six letters" mean "I wrote six letters"? :shock:

That's what it means to me, but it's not what it means to Tarheel.

As you've discovered, English has a lot of gray areas.

I prefer:

- I've written six letter since lunchtime.
- I wrote six letters after lunch.

The first is more immediate. It means you wrote them this afternoon. In the second, you might have written them today, yesterday, or ten years ago. Then there's:

- I've written six letters since lunch so far.

That means you're not done yet, you're still have more to write.

 

[Tarheel]

Kadioguy, as you have already noticed, context makes a difference. Within a specific context you can be more specific. Outside of that context there is more room for interpretation.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Kadioguy, as you have already noticed, context makes a difference. Within a specific context you can be more specific. Outside of that context there is more room for interpretation.

Exactly!

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

PS - Kadio, as you can see, English is hard to master. - even for those of us who have spoken it all our lives! Just keep asking questions. Things will start to make sense if you stick with it.

 

[Tdol]

'I've been writing six letters in an hour.'

Simultaneously?