| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dduck

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 Posts: 422 Location: In the middle
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 4:34 pm Post subject: Re: Nobody's perfect |
|
|
| johnslat wrote: |
You know, at first I wondered if tubig was writing about the use of "have/has got" in British English to denote usual ownership. We Yanks say - "I have a car" whereas I THINK British English would more likely be - "I've got a car"
|
My English must be more Americanized than I realised: I thought this was the other way around.
| johnslat wrote: |
"Hamad has moved chairs" ( which doesn't "sound right" to me ).
"The chairs have been moved" (which does).
|
If the passive form is correct, then the active form has to be correct.
Iain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dmb

Joined: 12 Feb 2003 Posts: 8397
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| john, with regard to goldilocks. When the continuous is used the focus is on the action but when the simple is used the focus is on the result. Is it not? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
johnslat

Joined: 21 Jan 2003 Posts: 13859 Location: Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear mjed9,
I suspect you have be right - although I consider
"Did you eat yet" or, as it sounds in American English "Jeet Jet"
to be a mistake / improper usage.
But then, for an American, I believe I'm more careful than most of my compatriots regarding the usage of the past / present perfect tenses.
Dear dmb,
When you use the terms "continuous" and "simple", you're talking about the present perfect continuous and the present perfect simple, right? If so, I'd agree that the PPS tends to focus on the result while the PPC speaks more about the action.
Dear dduck,
Maybe it IS the other way around. And maybe it's just the omission of " the " in that sentence:
"Hamad has moved chairs" ( "Hamad has moved THE chairs")
that made it "sound strange" to me.
Regards,
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shmooj

Joined: 11 Sep 2003 Posts: 1758 Location: Seoul, ROK
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John, I hear you... but I'm not so sure that present perfect doesn't extend into future time in some way, particularly continuous forms. I'm aware that "have" cannot take a continuous form for possession so it might not be the best example to explore this, but if I come up with this example:
I've been having these headaches for years now.
... would you concede that there is some future implied here i.e. that the speaker is concerned how long they might last or what to do about them? I feel that the example does have some implication for the future.
Going back to "have" for possession, sure, you are going to possess something in the future too but at the point you say "I've got a car." that is irrelevant as much as the future is irrelevant in "I've lived here for a year." Both seem examples of present perfect to me.
Certainly, if I concede this point, it makes it easier to swing it by students as then it follows a rule and is not an exception that, as you said, would confuse "SOME" students. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shmooj

Joined: 11 Sep 2003 Posts: 1758 Location: Seoul, ROK
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dmb wrote: |
| john, with regard to goldilocks. When the continuous is used the focus is on the action but when the simple is used the focus is on the result. Is it not? |
The way I teach it is this:
PPC => result brought on by drawn out effect
PPS => result brought on by instantaneous effect
Hence,
A: What have you done?
B: I've sunbathed. x I've cut myself.
and
A: What have you been doing?
B: I've been cutting myself. x I've been sunbathing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
FGT

Joined: 14 Sep 2003 Posts: 762 Location: Turkey
|
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2003 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
The fundamental purpose of Present Perfect is that we (US or UK) use this to link past and present time. Similarly, past perfect is used to link two past times and future perfect is used to link a future time with an earlier time.
Yes, there are differences in usage between US and UK. Generally UK speakers use PP when US (may) use past simple.
There are differences between the continuous and simple form and, broadly speaking, I would agree that action vs result, and duration dictate which one uses.
As for "have" vs "have got" ; the former is more common in US, the latter more common in spoken/informal UK, but UK favours "have" for formal written usage.
In my opinion, "have got" is present perfect because it fulfills the criterion of linking past and present. Eg: I was born with green eyes, I have them now, therefore I've got green eyes.
Now the big question: how do you TEACH it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mjed9
Joined: 25 Oct 2003 Posts: 242
|
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
I draw a timeline on the board to represent someone's life ... ... I think it makes it rather clear and have received good feedback from this.
I try to simplify its use ... especially if its the first time the student has been properly exposed to it.
1) We use PP to talk about experiences that we HAVE HAD ... when there is on specific reference to time (i.e. I'm not telling you exactly when I did something but just that I have done it) ... as soon as you bring in a specific time reference you have to revert to the simple past.
"I have been to America" (a non-specific past experience)
"When did you go?"
"I went to America last year" (a specific time-referenced past experience)
2) We use PP to express an action that started in the past and is true now.
"I have lived in Outer Mongolia for ten months / since last Tuesday"
This suggests that it is still true now and its usually emphasised through the use of "for" and "since".
3) We use PP to express an action that has been completed in the past and has an effect on now (alhtough this is similar to point 1)
"I have eaten" -> present effect "I am not hungry"
"I have forgotten" -> present effect "I cannot remember"
"I have been crying" -> present effect "my eyes are red"
Its difficult to give anything but a suggestion of how to use this tense correctly. I usually end up telling them that from now on its better to say things like
I have forgotten
I have finished
I have eaten
and hope that their brains will eventually figure out why ... implicit learning!
Feedback?
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shmooj

Joined: 11 Sep 2003 Posts: 1758 Location: Seoul, ROK
|
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2003 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FGT wrote: |
| Now the big question: how do you TEACH it? |
Aaahh now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for your PP example of possession with eyes. I hadn't thought of that one and it does tend to indicate PP tense doesn't it.
Timelines are so amazingly valuable but there must be cases where you have to be careful. It is a form of visual metalanguage and, as such, timelines themselves need to be taught. A good example of this is that the western idea of past = left and now = right might not be logical in the middle east. Students sometimes need a lot of help understanding the timelines themselves before we even get on to the grammar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dmb

Joined: 12 Feb 2003 Posts: 8 |