will have been studying

[ostap77]

future perfect tense can not be replaced by the simple future all the time
for example if I say
1-by the time my friend comes, I will have made a cake.
2-by the time my friend comes, I will make a cake.

sentence 1 and 2 are completely different (for me or to me :-?)

About sentence number two.

" When John arrives, he's sure going to tell us,If they will have finished this work by the end of the week"

OR

"When John arrives, he's sure going to tell us, If they will get this work over and done with by the end of the week."

 

[riquecohen]

Again, I don't know if this might be a BrE vs AmE difference, but in BrE we wouldn't use the future continuous here.

When you get there, I will [already] have been watching it for 30 minutes.
When you get there, it will [already] have been on for 30 minutes.

"When you get there, I'll be watching it for 30 minutes" means, to me, that after you arrive, I will watch 30 minutes of the program/game and then stop watching it.

There´s no difference here between AmE and BrE. Someone is bound to respond that they hear the future continuous used frquently in this situation, however this is just poor grammar.

 

[ostap77]

There´s no difference here between AmE and BrE. Someone is bound to respond that they hear the future continuous used frquently in this situation, however this is just poor grammar.

How about my examples? Is the second one correct?

 

[TheParser]

How about my examples? Is the second one correct?

NOT A TEACHER

I just thought of another way native speakers might use in order to

avoid the future perfect:

When you get here, I will already be a half hour into the program.

 

[bhaisahab]

NOT A TEACHER

I just thought of another way native speakers might use in order to

avoid the future perfect:

When you get here, I will already be a half hour into the program.

Do you think that that is any easier to say than this:
"When you get there, I will have been watching it for 30 minutes."?
The latter is one word shorter and a lot more elegant.

 

[TheParser]

Do you think that that is any easier to say than this:
"When you get there, I will have been watching it for 30 minutes."?
The latter is one word shorter and a lot more elegant.

NOT A TEACHER

(1) What I think is of no importance.

(2) The original poster wanted to know whether native speakers

avoid the future perfect by using other constructions. I just gave him

an example of what some people might say. I made no judgment as to

its elegance.

 

[bhaisahab]

NOT A TEACHER

(1) What I think is of no importance.

(2) The original poster wanted to know whether native speakers

avoid the future perfect by using other constructions. I just gave him

an example of what some people might say. I made no judgment as to

its elegance.

Yes but my point is, why take the trouble to avoid it by using a longer, less elegant sentence? Deliberate dumbing down perhaps?

 

[TheParser]

Yes but my point is, why take the trouble to avoid it by using a longer, less elegant sentence? Deliberate dumbing down perhaps?

NOT A TEACHER

(1) Yes, sir, learners and native speakers should try to use the future

perfect.

(2) Perhaps, however, we should not be too critical of those who try to

avoid it.

(a) Professor George O. Curme (writing in 1931) says:

This form is a late and learned development which has not

yet become established in simple expression. It is not found

in the language of Shakespeare.

 

[ostap77]

NOT A TEACHER

(1) Yes, sir, learners and native speakers should try to use the future

perfect.

(2) Perhaps, however, we should not be too critical of those who try to

avoid it.

(a) Professor George O. Curme (writing in 1931) says:

This form is a late and learned development which has not

yet become established in simple expression. It is not found

in the language of Shakespeare.

I'm open to everything that might be said in everyday speech in order to understand it correctly if I come across it. We are not talking about taking an exam.