Do you notice any difference in meaning between these two questions?
1) "Did you eat?"
2) "Have you eaten?"
I think they are different but another teacher I work with says she uses them interchangeably.
simple past vs. present perfect
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
I'm sure this has come up before, but I couldn't find it. I did, however, find this thread which might be a start:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 45&start=0
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 45&start=0
-
Andrew Patterson
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Mmm, not a single mention of past time adverbials, don't even go there 
Lolwhites wrote:
Lolwhites wrote:
Perhaps, "Did you eat already," is more common in the US/Canada than just "Did you eat," but I'm not American so I can only really tell from what I have heard North Americans saying. This is one of the few Americanisms that are completely proscribed by British exam boards, btw, who are normally happy with students using American spellings (as long as they are consistent) and "gotten" as the past participle of "get". Sth tells me that SATS wouldn't accept it either, though.Just to confuse things further, I think there are times when a Brit would say Have you eaten? but an American would say Did you eat?. I wouldn't say they were interchangeable though, and I don't know what an Australian or New Zealander would say.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Are you referring to the half-baked nonsense that a certain Chinese learner of English spouted (hopefully, used to spoutAndrew Patterson wrote:Mmm, not a single mention of past time adverbials, don't even go there
) on the AL forum, Andy? I thought we'd all (especially JTT by way of Murphy) more or less shown that guy the error of his ways (his failing to notice or bother finding any evidence that would have dispelled his rather limited beliefs about English and therefore help disprove his allegations about the "state" of ELT etc).CONTEXTMAN raises his....
Good evening all!
CONTEXTMAN raises his ugly head from that dull translation he's doing on John Deere Front Loaders with Single-Lever Joystick Electronic Control to make a bit of comment here. His spokesman, that is, Myself, is American by birth, though his English has deteriorated from so many years not speaking the language actively or regularly and thus acquiring errors from his Spanish speaking students.
In any case, both of the examples, "Did you eat" and "Have you eaten" would be heard from any American. What they seem to be missing is what I (perhaps innocently and mistakenly) refer to as the "time marker"; that is, that charming string of sounds we usually peg onto the end of the utterance to make sure the listener understands exactly in what time frame the speaker is communicating his/her idea. So,
"Did you eat yesterday?" or "Did you eat at 12 or at 12.30?"
and
"Have you eaten yet?" or "Have you already eaten?"
make the examples just a little more clear as to their meaning and the subsequent use of the simple past or the present perfect. I personally don't think it has a lot to do with if one lives on the grand continent or on the islands but rather what universe of discourse rules over the use of the question. I don't doubt that any American might use "Did you" when grammatically or syntacticly (does that word exist?) he/she ought to have used "Have you", but I also don't doubt that any English man might make the same "error" under any given circumstances, which CONTEXTMAN won't try to list here, as that translation is only three exciting, emotion-packed pages from being completed, "Troubleshooting your John Deere Front Loader".
peace,
revel.
CONTEXTMAN raises his ugly head from that dull translation he's doing on John Deere Front Loaders with Single-Lever Joystick Electronic Control to make a bit of comment here. His spokesman, that is, Myself, is American by birth, though his English has deteriorated from so many years not speaking the language actively or regularly and thus acquiring errors from his Spanish speaking students.
In any case, both of the examples, "Did you eat" and "Have you eaten" would be heard from any American. What they seem to be missing is what I (perhaps innocently and mistakenly) refer to as the "time marker"; that is, that charming string of sounds we usually peg onto the end of the utterance to make sure the listener understands exactly in what time frame the speaker is communicating his/her idea. So,
"Did you eat yesterday?" or "Did you eat at 12 or at 12.30?"
and
"Have you eaten yet?" or "Have you already eaten?"
make the examples just a little more clear as to their meaning and the subsequent use of the simple past or the present perfect. I personally don't think it has a lot to do with if one lives on the grand continent or on the islands but rather what universe of discourse rules over the use of the question. I don't doubt that any American might use "Did you" when grammatically or syntacticly (does that word exist?) he/she ought to have used "Have you", but I also don't doubt that any English man might make the same "error" under any given circumstances, which CONTEXTMAN won't try to list here, as that translation is only three exciting, emotion-packed pages from being completed, "Troubleshooting your John Deere Front Loader".
peace,
revel.
-
Stephen Jones
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm
I think CONTEXTMAN should only raise his ugly head when there is a context, because he's quite uninvited in this case 
The whole point of the question is surely that there aren't any time markers.
Now in British English "Did you eat" would have an implied time marker - that is to say the speaker is thinking of a specific period of time or opportunity where the other had a chance to eat. Perhaps the other has gone out of the office and come back, or perhaps the speaker is the mother and the other is her son who went round to a friend's house after school.
On the other hand 'have you eaten' makes no such assumption.
Now I believe that what Tara is saying is that her colleague would use 'did you eat' interchangeably with 'have you eaten', without any implied time marker, whilst she and I would not.
The whole point of the question is surely that there aren't any time markers.
Now in British English "Did you eat" would have an implied time marker - that is to say the speaker is thinking of a specific period of time or opportunity where the other had a chance to eat. Perhaps the other has gone out of the office and come back, or perhaps the speaker is the mother and the other is her son who went round to a friend's house after school.
On the other hand 'have you eaten' makes no such assumption.
Now I believe that what Tara is saying is that her colleague would use 'did you eat' interchangeably with 'have you eaten', without any implied time marker, whilst she and I would not.
I'd never say did you eat already? and I don't think anyone else from this fair isle at the wrong end of the North Atlantic storm track would either. Have you eaten already is fine to me. The two might be interchangeable for US speakers but not Brits. Not that there's anything wrong with US English, bien sûr, but let's be aware there's a difference in use.
Does this mean Contextman is American?
Does this mean Contextman is American?
Having given a context....
Good morning to all!
Well, Steven having offered a context, CONTEXTMAN certainly would feel invited to continue commenting, but as Steven puts it fairly clearly and concisely, there isn't really any need to get CONTEXTMAN out of bed and into his pink tights.
I (remember, born American) certainly have family that would possibly say something like "Did you eat already?", but then, that same family would say something like "Did you eat them there apples already?" Charming, midwestern variation on Standard American English. My family is well read but have had no active contact with English beyond high-school, and they all went to high-school long before writing was considered a corner-stone of educational systems. I, myself, would never say "Did you eat already?", nor could I imagine my colleagues at university saying such a thing.
CONTEXTMAN was born in Spain, though he is not Spanish. I think he prefers to be considered a "son of the earth" rather than being from any particular geographical area or accident. His sole purpose in life is to point out the lack of context when it interferes with the understanding of English. That purpose doesn't always fit in with grammatical analysis, but he sometimes just can't help himself.
peace,
revel.
Well, Steven having offered a context, CONTEXTMAN certainly would feel invited to continue commenting, but as Steven puts it fairly clearly and concisely, there isn't really any need to get CONTEXTMAN out of bed and into his pink tights.
I (remember, born American) certainly have family that would possibly say something like "Did you eat already?", but then, that same family would say something like "Did you eat them there apples already?" Charming, midwestern variation on Standard American English. My family is well read but have had no active contact with English beyond high-school, and they all went to high-school long before writing was considered a corner-stone of educational systems. I, myself, would never say "Did you eat already?", nor could I imagine my colleagues at university saying such a thing.
CONTEXTMAN was born in Spain, though he is not Spanish. I think he prefers to be considered a "son of the earth" rather than being from any particular geographical area or accident. His sole purpose in life is to point out the lack of context when it interferes with the understanding of English. That purpose doesn't always fit in with grammatical analysis, but he sometimes just can't help himself.
peace,
revel.
-
Stephen Jones
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm
Actually revel 'did you eat already?' is BBC English
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learn ... v123.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learn ... v123.shtml
Replying to my own post again! Shoot me now!
Stephen Jones was right: Both sentences are, of course, grammatically correct. The question is, pragmatically speaking, should they occur in complementary distribution or are they interchangeable? Without leading you to a certain answer, I was hoping some of you might provide the contexts in which you thought they would be found.
Stephen offered the textbook answer:
In the question "Did you eat?" it is true that the action of eating would have happened at a specific point in the past. However, more importantly, the question assumes that the opportunity to eat is past, and that, whether the listener answers yes or no, he/she will not be eating now or any time soon. The food is gone, or lunchtime is over, or something like that.
In the question "Have you eaten?" by contrast, the speaker is assuming that the listener still has the opportunity to eat. In the case that the listener responds "no", the speaker is assuming that he/she will then eat in the near future. From a pragmatic point of view, this question could even be taken as an invitation; you could say this while offering someone food.
I'm not trying to nitpick these particular sentences, but rather use them to demonstrate the larger question. The difference between the simple past and the present perfect has to do with your assumptions about the future. When you use the simple past, you assume that the action started in the past, and finished in the past. When you use the present perfect, you assume that the action started in the past, continues in the present, and may continue into the future. In other words, simple past communicates that the action is complete. Present perfect communicates how much of the action is complete up to now, but leaves the door open for the action to continue in the future before it's totally complete.
But the clincher is not whether the action is complete (both tenses communicate completion), nor whether the action occurred at a specific time or not (because both tenses can be used without specifics). It seems to me, the big difference is what is being communicated about the present and the future.
Another example?
"I lived in New York for 5 years." (Speaker does not live in New York today.)
"I have lived in New York for 5 years." (Speaker lives in New York today and will continue to do so in the future.)
This is the clearest way that I've seen to explain the difference between simple past and present perfect. And yet, none of the grammar books use it. Am I crazy? Or just ahead of my time?
Stephen Jones was right: Both sentences are, of course, grammatically correct. The question is, pragmatically speaking, should they occur in complementary distribution or are they interchangeable? Without leading you to a certain answer, I was hoping some of you might provide the contexts in which you thought they would be found.
Stephen offered the textbook answer:
However, I am not completely satisfied with the textbook answer, which is why I posted this post. My gut feeling tells me that the main difference between the simple past and the present perfect (so-called) has more to do with the future than the past. Let me explain.the speaker is thinking of a specific period of time or opportunity where the other had a chance to eat. Perhaps the other has gone out of the office and come back, or perhaps the speaker is the mother and the other is her son who went round to a friend's house after school.
In the question "Did you eat?" it is true that the action of eating would have happened at a specific point in the past. However, more importantly, the question assumes that the opportunity to eat is past, and that, whether the listener answers yes or no, he/she will not be eating now or any time soon. The food is gone, or lunchtime is over, or something like that.
In the question "Have you eaten?" by contrast, the speaker is assuming that the listener still has the opportunity to eat. In the case that the listener responds "no", the speaker is assuming that he/she will then eat in the near future. From a pragmatic point of view, this question could even be taken as an invitation; you could say this while offering someone food.
I'm not trying to nitpick these particular sentences, but rather use them to demonstrate the larger question. The difference between the simple past and the present perfect has to do with your assumptions about the future. When you use the simple past, you assume that the action started in the past, and finished in the past. When you use the present perfect, you assume that the action started in the past, continues in the present, and may continue into the future. In other words, simple past communicates that the action is complete. Present perfect communicates how much of the action is complete up to now, but leaves the door open for the action to continue in the future before it's totally complete.
But the clincher is not whether the action is complete (both tenses communicate completion), nor whether the action occurred at a specific time or not (because both tenses can be used without specifics). It seems to me, the big difference is what is being communicated about the present and the future.
Another example?
"I lived in New York for 5 years." (Speaker does not live in New York today.)
"I have lived in New York for 5 years." (Speaker lives in New York today and will continue to do so in the future.)
This is the clearest way that I've seen to explain the difference between simple past and present perfect. And yet, none of the grammar books use it. Am I crazy? Or just ahead of my time?
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Tara B wrote:In the question "Did you eat?" it is true that the action of eating would have happened at a specific point in the past. However, more importantly, the question assumes that the opportunity to eat is past, and that, whether the listener answers yes or no, he/she will not be eating now or any time soon. The food is gone, or lunchtime is over, or something like that.
A: Did you eat (your lunch/lunch (yet))?B: No (for whatever reason).
A: Wanna go for/have/share (my) lunch with me, then?
The conversation unfolds in exactly the same way as one that begins with 'Have you...?', and the unfolding is dependent upon the form of the answer rather than the form of the question, no?
That's exactly the question. Obviously, the speaker can turn the conversation whatever way he/she wants. But, the point is, in that situation, wouldn't most people start the conversation with the present perfect?
Storytime.
Story #1. It's 10:00 pm. (In the US, OK?, we eat around 6 or 7.) Mom and Dad are sitting on the couch, watching TV. College student walks in the door. Mom asks:
a) "Did you eat?"
b) "Have you eaten?"
c) either one is fine.
Story #2. It's 6:30 pm. Roommate is in the kitchen, making dinner. Other roommate arrives home and goes to put his stuff away. The cooking roommate asks him:
a) "Did you eat?"
b) "Have you eaten?"
c) either one is fine.
If I were the mom and the first roommate, I would say a) in the first story and b) in the second story. (Although, the context for the first story is, granted, a little weird. But maybe the son is anorexic or something.) I assumed that most native speakers would agree with me, but maybe I'm just living in my own little fantasy grammar world. That's always possible.
Storytime.
Story #1. It's 10:00 pm. (In the US, OK?, we eat around 6 or 7.) Mom and Dad are sitting on the couch, watching TV. College student walks in the door. Mom asks:
a) "Did you eat?"
b) "Have you eaten?"
c) either one is fine.
Story #2. It's 6:30 pm. Roommate is in the kitchen, making dinner. Other roommate arrives home and goes to put his stuff away. The cooking roommate asks him:
a) "Did you eat?"
b) "Have you eaten?"
c) either one is fine.
If I were the mom and the first roommate, I would say a) in the first story and b) in the second story. (Although, the context for the first story is, granted, a little weird. But maybe the son is anorexic or something.) I assumed that most native speakers would agree with me, but maybe I'm just living in my own little fantasy grammar world. That's always possible.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
I'm a Brit, so I would use present perfect in the first situation (asking a colleague about lunch a short while into lunchtime). I have no idea what Americans can or usually say in this sort of situation, but I assumed they had a choice, right?
Changing not only nationality but sex, I would, speaking as a mum, probably opt for a), but I suppose b) (and therefore c)) would also be possible. To me, there is always an "assumed" element to the use of simple past: 'Did you eat dinner at your friend's house then - at least that's what I'm assuming you did, seeing as that's where you were when you called me to say you'd be back here in time to have dinner with us. Your poor father could've had more himself if we'd known you weren't coming back etc etc', and a 'Did you' question without the appended "background, shared, assumed" knowledge seems strange. I therefore would say a caring British mum at least should use 'Have you eaten/had any dinner yet?' in a very general "context".
B) certainly does seem the natural choice (offer) in the second story.
That is all a rather long way of saying that, without extra context beyond what you've given for each story, I (as a Brit) would choose 'Have you eaten' each time (and given more context, 'Did you eat...' would be possible in the second story). Is that the answer you were looking for?
Changing not only nationality but sex, I would, speaking as a mum, probably opt for a), but I suppose b) (and therefore c)) would also be possible. To me, there is always an "assumed" element to the use of simple past: 'Did you eat dinner at your friend's house then - at least that's what I'm assuming you did, seeing as that's where you were when you called me to say you'd be back here in time to have dinner with us. Your poor father could've had more himself if we'd known you weren't coming back etc etc', and a 'Did you' question without the appended "background, shared, assumed" knowledge seems strange. I therefore would say a caring British mum at least should use 'Have you eaten/had any dinner yet?' in a very general "context".
B) certainly does seem the natural choice (offer) in the second story.
That is all a rather long way of saying that, without extra context beyond what you've given for each story, I (as a Brit) would choose 'Have you eaten' each time (and given more context, 'Did you eat...' would be possible in the second story). Is that the answer you were looking for?
Fluffyhamster wrote:
My colleague and I are both Americans, and yet we use the sentences differently. Putting continental differences aside, then, is one of us wrong (or, if you prefer, is one of us less in touch with reality)?
) I guess I'll console myself that SJ agrees with me . Sort of.
I think we are making too much out of the British/American differences here. I'm not sure your using present perfect in this situation has anything to do with you being a Brit.I'm a Brit, so I would use present perfect in the first situation.
My colleague and I are both Americans, and yet we use the sentences differently. Putting continental differences aside, then, is one of us wrong (or, if you prefer, is one of us less in touch with reality)?
This conversation sounds weird to me. That is my point. However, since it sounded OK to you, maybe you've answered my question. (Just not with the answer I wanted to hear.A: Did you eat (your lunch/lunch (yet))?
B: No (for whatever reason).
A: Wanna go for/have/share (my) lunch with me, then?
The conversation unfolds in exactly the same way as one that begins with 'Have you...?', and the unfolding is dependent upon the form of the answer rather than the form of the question, no?
) I guess I'll console myself that SJ agrees with me . Sort of.