What's happened? I've fallen into a puddle

[Alexey86]

Consider the following uses of the present perfect and the past simple:
1) A man who always came home clean, comes home muddy. His little son comes out and asks, "What's happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?
Father: "I've fallen into a puddle."

2) Son: "What’s happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"
Father: "I fell into a puddle."

3) Son: "What happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"
Father: "I’ve fallen into a puddle."

4) Son: "What happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"
Father: "I fell into a puddle."


Which variant is better/correct?

I think the first one because: 1) "What’s happened?" = "What event has led to the fact that you look muddy right now?", 2) The present perfect in the answer = "The falling into a puddle on the way home has made my clothes muddy."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Consider the following uses of the present perfect and the past simple:
1) A man who always came home clean[STRIKE],[/STRIKE] comes home muddy. His little son comes out and asks, "What's happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"

Father: "I fell into a puddle."

2) Son: "What’s happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"

Father: "I fell into a puddle."

3) Son: "What happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"

Father: "I fell into a puddle."

4) Son: "What happened, Daddy? Why are you muddy?"

Father: "I fell into a puddle."

Which variant is better/correct?

"I fell into a puddle" is correct.

I think the first one because: 1) "What’s happened?" = "What event has led to the fact that you look muddy right now?", 2) The present perfect in the answer = "[STRIKE]The[/STRIKE] Falling into a puddle on the way home has made my clothes muddy."

The father would only say,"I've fallen into a puddle" if he were still in the puddle. Since he's home, he's not in the puddle anymore. So the simple past is correct.

Either of the son's choices might make sensen depending on how you look at it. But the simple past, "What happened?" is more likely and natural.

 

[Alexey86]

I thought we should use the present perfect to explain the reason of our current state = what has led to this state (the state of being muddy in my example).

 

[tedmc]

I thought we should use the present perfect to explain the reason of our current state = what has led to this state (the state of being muddy in my example).

The current state is a result of a past event which is over.

 

[Tarheel]

It might be worth saying that nobody would ever say that. A puddle is a very shallow body of water that nobody can fall into. You can step into a puddle, but you can't fall into one.

Maybe he got splashed by a passing car.

Also, "What happened?" is correct, not "What's happened?"

 

[Alexey86]

Puddles can be quite deep in Russia.

 

[Alexey86]

Either of the son's choices might make sensen depending on how you look at it.

Could you or other members elaborate on that please?

- What has led to him being muddy?
- He fell into a puddle.

Does the present perfect in the question mean the fact of leading to being muddy, not the falling itself, is still relevent because he is still muddy?

 

[tedmc]

He accidentally stepped into a puddle and got himself muddy. Stepping into a puddle happened in an instant and doesn't lead to anything. It was the reason he became muddy. The present perfect tense is not applicable.

 

[Alexey86]

Stepping into a puddle happened in an instant and doesn't lead to anything. It was the reason he became muddy. The present perfect tense is not applicable.

I always thought reasons were things whose job is to lead to something (consequences). In my example, the state of being muddy is the consequence (still current) of his stepping into a puddle, isn't it?

 

[jutfrank]

The most likely natural conversation by far is number 4, as Charlie has said in post #2.

Your reasoning about explaining present circumstances is on the right lines, but you're overgeneralising the principle. In this context, Daddy is most likely to be relating a story about a past event. His falling into a puddle has insufficient present relevance at the later time of speaking to his son. We don't imagine the incident as being in any way impactful on the moment of speaking to his son. That is, the present evidence of muddy clothes is not well enough connected to the event of falling. Again, as Charlie says, if he were still in the puddle, then that would certainly be sufficient present relevance to demand the present perfect.

However, if Daddy's line did not specifically mention the action of falling into the puddle, and instead mentioned the incident in a more vague way, then it would be to some degree more likely that he'd use the present perfect—you could imagine Daddy explaining: I've had an accident. In this case, he's making more of a connection between the past event and the present evidence, perhaps accompanied by hand gesturing to the state of his clothes.

There's no clear cut rule about when exactly past events cease to be presently relevant because it depends on so many factors. This is partly why it's so hard for learners to get a feel for the present perfect. Teachers can only teach these rules as basic principles. The only way to learn it properly is by learning it naturally: in other words, by encountering the grammar in natural use enough times for acquisition to happen.

 

[Alexey86]

Well, all your replies definitely shows me that I overuse the present perfect. And I didn't even know about that.

 

[tedmc]

Well, all your replies definitely show[STRIKE]s[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]me[/STRIKE] that I overused (the present perfect is better here) the present perfect. And I didn't even know [STRIKE]about[/STRIKE] that.

.

 

[Alexey86]

I've just realized that I've been overusing the present perfect for many years.:-o

P.S. Sorry for my blunders in the replies.

 

[emsr2d2]

Your use of "overuse" in post #11 was correct because you were talking about a habitual action.

 

[Alexey86]

Your use of "overuse" in post #11 was correct because you were talking about a habitual action.

That's exactly what I meant. But "shows" after "replies" was horrible.

 

[emsr2d2]

That's exactly what I meant.

Yes, I realised that immediately when I read it. I clarified it because tedmc incorrectly changed it to "overused" in post #12.

 

[jutfrank]

I've just realized that I've been overusing the present perfect for many years.:-o

Yes, good. This is really quite normal, you know. Hopefully, this realisation will lead to your noticing more sensitively how native speakers use it, which in turn will lead to your better controlling it.

Encouragingly, you've made a perfect use of both present perfect simple and continuous in the observation quoted above.

 

[Alexey86]

Encouragingly, you've made a perfect use of both present perfect simple and continuous in the observation quoted above.

I thought the sentence would sound funny like, "Damn, I've just realized I overuse the word "damn."

What about this situation: I'm going to pay for the goods in the store and suddenly realize that I left (have left?) my wallet at home:
Cashier: 19.50
Me: Sorry, I've just realized I left/have left my wallet at home.

 

[Tarheel]

I thought the sentence would sound funny like, "Damn, I've just realized I overuse the word "damn."

What about this situation: I'm going to pay for the goods in the store and suddenly realize that I left (have left?) my wallet at home:
Cashier: 19.50
Me: Sorry, I've just realized I left/have left my wallet at home.

I would say:

Oh my gosh! I just realized that I left my wallet at home.

 

[jutfrank]

What about this situation: I'm going to pay for the goods in the store and suddenly realize that I left (have left?) my wallet at home:
Cashier: 19.50
Me: Sorry, I've just realized I left/have left my wallet at home.

That's a good example situation, yes. The present perfect is ideally suited there.

I think one very simple observation we can make is that when there is considered to be some kind of pressing problem, the present perfect is ideal. In the case of the puddle, Daddy has a pressing problem when he's in the puddle whereas he doesn't when he later recounts the incident to his son. And in the case of the wallet, you have a pressing problem in that you are unable to pay for the goods.

The example sentence pair that I like to use in my own lessons is this:

1) I've cut my finger.
2) I cut my finger.

With number 1, the speaker wishes to express that there is a problem. Maybe she needs medical attention, or sympathy, or whatever. With 2, it's just a matter-of-fact statement about a past event—it isn't a pressing problem, even though there may well be remaining (present) evidence of the event, in the form of a wound or scar, for example.

I'll stress that I'm not saying that all uses of present perfect express pressing problems, of course.