Has been to in: a present perfect tense?
Is popularity of Martin Schulz an “irrational bubble”? As the former president of the European Parliament, Mr Schulz has been a friend of Mr Schulz for over 10 years. His view of politics, ethics, remarkability, and genuine understanding of modern politics is on the decline with Mr Schulz’s departure.
What with a maniac centre-left party that has lost its way in Europe? When the SPD last won elections in 1998, Gerhard Schru00f6der becomes the chancellor.
What is your question about a computer?
The phrase “has been to” is in present perfect tense, but this phrase is more commonly used equally as “has gone to” in sentence like “I have been to visit my mother twice this month” I mean to express an “effect ” which has already happened, why bother the writer using the phrase “has been to awaken” rather than using the more common expression “has awakened” to indicate a present perfect tense?
How is it that one of the greatest tragedies we’ve suffered has happened?
“Have been” is NOT “much frequently” used in the sense you describe. It is ordinarily a simple copula. It is not often enlarged.
Why do some people associate the odd ellipsis with dual senses? In the perfect Idiom have been to X, meaning “HAVE gone to X and returned”, the to X is a locative PP headed by the preposition to : I’ve been
to London to visit the Queen. This is a pk because I visited the palace afterwards.
I’ve been to Princeton for a conference.
In the example you give, “I’ve been to visit my mother,” the locative is omitted because it’s recoverable from context, semantically overlapping the marked infinitival of purpose to visit. We infer that to destination is the mother’s residence. Ordinarily, however, the locative is required to “constitute” the idiom.
In any case, I don’t think any native speaker would even momentarily take has been to mean “The effect has gone and returned.” The idiom ordinarily licenses only ‘agentive’ subjects. an effect cannot “go” somewhere. Similarly, has awakened cannot be substituted, because an effect is not capable of “awakening” the base of a party: the awakening is the impact of the awakening.
The effect; Consequently the default parsing of The effect has been is as the simple copula; and what follows is readily taken to be an infinitival predicative complement.
I suspect from your question I may be distracted by the German use of SEIN as a perfect auxiliary with verbs of motion. How did English originally have this construction but this fell out of use 300 years ago? In Present-Day English only have is permitted as a perfect auxiliary…
What is the basic reason why people don’t speak English fluently?
