Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Ancora sul present perfect

Un esercizio che potrei definire di riepilogo.
L'obiettivo č di capire quando usare il past simple e quando il present
perfect(mi sta facendo impazzire) scegliendo il tempo adatto del verbo in
parentesi.
1)
Have you ever been (you/ever/be) to Florida?
Yes, we  went (go) there on holiday two years ago.
Had you (you/have) a good time?
Yes, it was (be) great.
2)
Where's Alan? Have you seen (you/see) him?
Yes, he went (go) out a few minutes ago.
And Julia?
I don't know. I haven't seen (not/see) her.
3)
Rose  works in  a factory. She has worked (work) there for six months.
Before that she was (be) a waitress  in a restaurant. She worked (work) there
for two years but she didn't enjoy (not/enjoy) it very much.
4)
Do you know Martin's sister?
I saw (see) her a few times but I have never spoken (never/speak) to her.
(you/ever/speak) Have you ever spoken to her?
Yes, I met (meet) her at a party last week. She's very nice.
 
Nel caso abbia sbagliato i tempi(cosa molto probabile) oltre alla correzione,
sarebbe molto gradita una spiegazione sul perchč si usa quel tempo.
 
Grazie.

 I saw (see) her a few times but I have never spoken (never/speak) to her.
"I've seen her a few times but I've never spoken to her". (l'ho vista poche
volte... in vita mia).
Ciao, FB
-- 
Se dico "siedi!" manca l'oggetto.
Siedo chi? Lei o me?
(GC Pillan su it.cultura.linguistica.italiano)

 "She's been working..." penso sia più adatta.
dubbio, se dici "she's been working there for six months" credo che lei non
sia mai
uscita dalla fabbrica ed abbia lavorato per sei mesi senza tregua <g>

 dubbio infondato
mmm... e perchč?
cioč, non mi lasci capire molto in questo modo
qual č la frase corretta secondo te? e perchč?

 Ho capito bene?
Direi di sě, almeno in teoria: "few" č "pochi/e", "a few" č "un po' di".
Ciao, FB
-- 
Mrs. Palmer, in her way, was equally angry. 'She was determined to drop his
acquaintance immediately, and she was very thankful that she had never been
acquainted with him at all'.

 qual č la frase corretta secondo te? e perchč?
La scelta del present perfect simple o continuous č molto arbitraria. Con
alcuni verbi il present perfect simple č praticamente vietato, mentre con
gli altri si usano entrambi, a volte con significati diversi.
Il present perfect continuous si usa per azioni che continuano fino a
questo momento o fino a un momento fa, ma se uno lavora per sei mesi non
significa che non č mai uscito dal posto di lavoro, di solito.


 Con alcuni verbi il present perfect simple è praticamente vietato
Volevo dire "present perfect continuous".


uscita dalla fabbrica ed abbia lavorato per sei mesi senza tregua <g>
č corretto she's been working there for ..... quando c'e' un azione
che si svolge in certo lasso di tempo questa e' la forma corretta

 wrote in message
news:40a75f81...@news.tiscali.it...

BUT  'I live in the Lake District. I've lived there for seven years.'  I'm
far more likely to say this than '...I've been living there for ....'  Same
applies to 'He works for BNFL - he's worked for them for ages .' It's maybe
owing to the very fact that I've already made clear that these actions are
still going on that I don't feel the need to bother with the continuous form
; however , I would also say/write , 'I've lived in the Lake District for
seven years and I've still not been up Sca Fell' ; this would clearly imply
that I'm still living there , and I can't imagine ever saying , 'I have been
living in ...'  If I weren't still living there , I would use the simple
past , 'I lived in ...'  Don't know about the US , but this is a standard
British usage .
Mike

 past , 'I lived in ...'  
Agreed.
-- 
I am Joey's Cat
Un-not my address, too, if you wanna reply.