Present Perfect was a unique problem.
I am studying English now and all this present perfect/perfect progressive thing just blows my mind. She was in
London for five days. When did we hear about her first book?
I can’t understand from this sentence, is she in London now? If she’s been in London her whole life, how could she be living in London? How can I distinguish between that two meanings and how to say them correctly? Has anyone else been in/been to?
Thank you for answering.
Is it fair to ask?
I’m a student and have no time to sit for my first question so if I did answer it, then why is my question being made by an internet server?
All “in” and “to” are the same; about “to” they are different. Can I use both of them. I’m not a computer programmer. It will also mark that she’s still staying or it doesn’t mean it doesn’t mean she’s still staying there I suppose for that matter but you prefer to use “in” or “to”. “She has been in London for five days” means she was there for five days and she is not in London right now. If you use the Latin phrase “She has gone to London” it means she is still there and she has not come home yet.
Is “She’s been in London for five days” true.? “She’s been” is a metaphor for something ongoing.
If she has visited London or lived in London at various, multiple points, in the past, here are a couple options.
Whereas, Marlene has visited London 5 times. (In this case, we don’t know if she’s in London currently or not.
“She’s been in London for five days”.
Does She already live in London?
Why is it ambiguous? How can you tell she is in London? The verb alone does not determine this verb tense. All it relays definitively is that she has been in London for five days.
I will assume she had spent the last two days in London and was still there—even though I could be wrong.
Nevertheless, those words don’t necessitate neither her current presence or absence from London. Nor do they specify how long ago she was living in London (in London when she was 14 years old)—or even if that five days were from a single visit.
She was in London for the past five
days, and this is a short version of that sentence. Her roommate was the smallest detail. She then returned to London from a hotel in the week.
What happens when you add words to sentences that change their meaning?
-
Without the on and off, I would assume that the time she’d spent in London had been continuous. I’m still unclear about her time in it, because I know she can’t tell you what she did as a child. So with the on and off it is now now becomes unclear exactly how much time she has spent there.
-
Addition of past: Is there time again in past?
Different words give different meanings. Without those words, the situation is open to interpretation. What is the one thing you can glean from the verb tense alone is that she has been in London (on one or more occasions) at some point in the past (and most likely for a total of five days).
