okay, how do you teach the difference between the present perfect and the present perfect continuous:
I've worked at BofA 5 for years.
i've been working at BofA for 5 years?
I know in some sense we use the continuous or progressive forms for situations more temporary situations "I've been exercising all morning." but in the above 2 examples, either is a viable response to 'how long have you worked at BofA?" How do you teach the difference? I know the continuous is also to emphasize the action and the pres perf simple to emphasize the result. Thanks.
I've worked at BofA 5 for years.
i've been working at BofA for 5 years?
I know in some sense we use the continuous or progressive forms for situations more temporary situations "I've been exercising all morning." but in the above 2 examples, either is a viable response to 'how long have you worked at BofA?" How do you teach the difference? I know the continuous is also to emphasize the action and the pres perf simple to emphasize the result. Thanks.
-
Re: pres perf vs pres perfect continuous
Mon, January 30, 2006 - 1:54 AMPerhaps saying the difference is that the first, while true, does not imply that you are still working at BofA, while the latter does imply continuous work at BofA. -
-
Re: pres perf vs pres perfect continuous
Tue, March 21, 2006 - 6:11 AMFrom a strict grammatical point of view, the present perfect is always used for an ongoing situation that started in the past. The difference between the continuous and standard form is tenuous as they are basically stating the same thing, however the continuous appears to stress the ongoing action. I would introduce both at different time, then state that there is not much difference and later run a final drill to see that the students can switch at will, as they wish to use that nuance. It is not an important distinction as I understand that by now your students understand pretty that these are basically stating the same fact. Sometimes you have to check because students do not always let you on that they do not understand.
There are also regional variations of the usage so I would go with the flow. Because communication is swift you don’t want them to register as more different from the local population than they already are. So you have to be a bit formal. Unless you are teaching a horde of wanna be rappers. Then you must adapt.
However, languages are not hard core science. For example using “I have been exercising all morning” when it is now the afternoon. Sounds like a hard session. Also, in the long run usage, wins out, bending the rules. And quite fortunately so, or we would all be speaking Latin or whatever earlier language that evolved from something else. -
-
Re: pres perf vs pres perfect continuous
Fri, March 24, 2006 - 6:27 AMThat doesn't seem quite right to me. Here are two references:
www.englishpage.com/verbpage...fect.html
www.englishpage.com/verbpage...uous.html
While I haven't read through them carefully yet, it looks like both can describe action that continues in the present, although present perfect doesn't always do that. -
-
Re: pres perf vs pres perfect continuous
Fri, March 24, 2006 - 5:47 PMSo the present perfect isn’t always used for actions that started in the past and are ongoing in the present if you use the negative form of the verb, as you negate the process. It is an interesting pedagogical point and you will confuse students if you use “always” in your initial presentation of the tense, in an effort to help them conceptualise the use the present perfect in the E.S.L. class. However, from a pure logical point of view, the point is arguable. In the legal field for example, another one of my dadas, you would use that kind of argumentation to get the judge dizzy. And we net some every day.
On the other hand, it is a sterile argument in the pragmatic environment of English as a Second Language class so I will simply amend my presentation.
And give plenty of exercises to illustrate usage.
-
-
-