Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: dubbio amletico

qual'e' il modo piu' correttoper dire:
"sto con la mia ragazza da 4 anni":
I've got a girlfriend from 4 years? 

 I've got a girlfriend from 4 years?
I've been with my girlfriend (for) four years. 


I've had a girlfriend for four years.

I've Been in hell for 4 years :-)
Saluti,
Bluff

> I've had a girlfriend for four years.
E' senz'altro sbagliata. L'azione ha ripercussioni sul presente, non si è 
conclusa. 

 conclusa.
Rileggi.
-- 
Bye, Ghost of Lem Novantotto
Informazioni su it.*: 
http://www.news.nic.it
Archivio news: 
http://groups.google.it/advanced_search?hl=it
Linee guida della netiquette: 
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html



Adam is Australian/British. Besides, why would a present perfect be
unsuitable to indicate that the action is still going on and affects the
present?
Bye, FB
-- 
"Che cos'è un fallo da tergo? E non stiamo parlando della tua vita
privata."
(Intervista della Gialappa's Band a Elisabetta Canalis)

Mirko77 wrote:

Well, that's why he wrote "I've" and not "I'd", I think.
-- 
Laz - [
http://www.dimensionedelta.net
]
"Real love isn't brains children, it's blood. It's blood screaming
inside you to work its will."

 conclusa.
Mi piace il "senz'altro"! ;)
-- 
Enrico C
...still legal tender...

 present?
Secondo me, se uno dice solo "I've had a girlfriend for four years." non si
capisce se ci sta ancora insieme o no, la storia potrebbe essere conclusa da
poco. O sbaglio?
Hamlet

Giò
-Tutto ciò che può esistere, esiste.
          (Tullio Regge)

I've got a girlfriend from 4 years? 
è quasi uguale all'italiano.
I've been with my girlfriend since four years ago.
(cfr canzone "I'm with you" per il modo di dire "stare con"
esattamente con "to be with")
ammetto che non è molto usato. anzi, sinceramente, nella mia
esperiena, non ho sentito quasi nessuno usare un'espressione
traducibile con "sto con".
ricordo un film in cui si diceva "I've been with her ever since",
quindi la struttura quella è.


I've had a girlfriend for four years
or
I've had a girlfriend since July of 2001 (if you want to use *since*
you need to give a specific point in time)
bye
ari

io direi che e' senz'altro giusta almeno dove sono io.  
bye
ari

"I've been with my girlfriend since four years ago"  is not correct or
at least it sounds wrong to my ears.  I don't think you can have since
and ago in the same sentence se sono riferiti alla stessa azione.
You can say:  I started dating my girlfriend 4 years ago or I've been
with my girlfriend for four years or  I've been with my girlfriend
since + specific date or point in time.
bye
ari

 poco. O sbaglio?
Sbagli :-)
Il present perfect indica appunto che l'azione continue tutt'ora.
Se fosse finito, ci vorrebbe il past simple.
-- 
Mary

 Il present perfect indica appunto che l'azione continue tutt'ora.
Oppure che è finita ma ha ancora conseguenze sul presente, no?
"I have had this girl for 4 years... Last month she dumped me, when she
found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still think of her."


 wrote in message 
news:B8VCe.6099$a5.8...@twister2.libero.it...

Though I disagree reluctantly with Adam , a native speaker whose Italian is 
miles better than mine , I agree that his version is ambiguous , as you say 
. 'I've had a girlfriend for four years . Now I'm going to do what *I* want 
to do for a change / Time to swing the other way now ' might be feasible 
continuations , whereas 'I've been with my girlfriend for four years now' , 
or ' My girlfriend and I have been together for four years' more 
unequivocally suggests , as does the Italian , a state of affairs which 
still obtains - at least , it does to me .
Mike 

 wrote in message 
news:42DC2E5B...@spamfinito.it...

So now I find myself disagreeing with Mary as well as Adam ? I recant ! I 
recant !!
All the same , I find myself murmuring 'Eppure si muove' . Don't we often 
use the present perfect for actions continuing up to the present , but not 
into the present ? 'I've been incredibly busy this week . Thank God it's 
Saturday' - so I'm not busy now . So isn't there often a possibility of 
ambiguity (don't I recall a recent discussion here about 'I have lived in 
Italy for four years' etc. ?) ? And isn't the Italian in this case asserting 
beyond any possibility of doubt that the state of affairs it describes is 
ongoing ?
I see that the example I've given - 'I have been (busy)' would appear to 
match one of my preferred versions , 'I have been (with my girlfriend)' , 
but in the latter case (as in 'My girlfriend and I') the 'my' removes any 
slight possibility of ambiguity , since in itself it confirms that the 
relationship is still current , something which 'a girlfriend' leaves open .
Mike 

 ongoing ?
Yes, it does. 
"Sto con una ragazza da quattro anni." implies we haven't broken up (yet!).


 still obtains - at least , it does to me .
I have to admit that "I've had a girlfriend for four years" was
me trying to stick as close as possible to the OP's version.
I suspect someone would actually say "My girlfriend and I have
been together for four years."
"I've had a girlfriend for four years" sound like something
a teenager would say, or perhaps someone responding to
a comment along the lines of "You've never had a girlfriend."
who wishes to point out that he has one at present, and has
been with her for four years.

Giň
-Tutto ciň che puň esistere, esiste.
          (Tullio Regge)

 . 'I've had a girlfriend for four years .
Can you use it also to say that you've had that sort of experience (do you
remember the man who had worked in Tokyo and Rome?)? E.g.
(1996==> 1997) ==> I had some girlfriends
(1997==> 2001) ==> I had the same girlfriend, X
(2002==> 2003) ==> I had another girlfriend, Y
(2003==> 2004) ==> I had yet another girlfriend, Z
(2004==> 2005) ==> No girlfriend
19/7/2005
Mike: I can't believe you can't have a serious relationship with a girl.
You seem to dismiss them after a year, at best.
F.B.: I've had a girlfriend for four years, from 1997 to 2001.
Is this possible? If so, I suppose it's only possibl because you say "from
1997 to 2001" after the verb. Am I right?
[...]
Bye, FB
-- 
Nasalization is just a part of life.
(Joey DoWop Dee on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)

 Se fosse finito, ci vorrebbe il past simple.
Spesso il present perfect si usa per un'azione passata che non è finita (e
quindi "arriva" fino ad oggi) ma guarda questo esempio:
I've done a lot of work today
Non significa che sto ancora lavorando, significa solo che oggi ho lavorato.
In questo caso, l'azione non continua.
Confrontiamolo con:
I did a lot of work yesterday
Qual è la differenza? Che (in questo caso) il present perfect si usa per
un'azione passata in un tempo che non è ancora finito (today) mentre il past
simple si usa per un'azione passata in un tempo finito (yesterday).
Quindi, se per esempio stessi parlando di ciò che mi è successo in questo
mese e dicessi ""I've had a girlfriend for four years.", il mio
interlocutore non sa se stiamo ancora insieme o no.
Hamlet

 F.B.: I've had a girlfriend for four years, from 1997 to 2001.
I would say "I had a girlfriend for four years, from 1997 to 2001"
Hamlet

 "Sto con una ragazza da quattro anni." implies we haven't broken up
(yet!).
Yes, if you use the present, it won't be any misunderstanding!
Hamlet

 interlocutore non sa se stiamo ancora insieme o no.
Detto cosě, certo che lo sa: siete ancora insieme.
Ciao, FB
-- 
Conversation like television set on honeymoon: unnecessary.
(Murder by Death)

 interlocutore non sa se stiamo ancora insieme o no.
Credo che la differenza con gli esemi che citi tu stia nel "for" (o, in 
altri casi, nel "since"). Dovrebbero fare la differenza.
-- 
Laz - [
http://www.dimensionedelta.net
]
"You were the Chosen One!" 

 E invece non sbaglio, Mary! :-)
Con coloro che sono madrelingua e lavorano come traduttori (e.g.
Mary)non discuterei molto.... cmq si puo sempre provare per togliersi i
dubbi.

 Mary)non discuterei molto...
La  mia conoscenza dell'inglese è ridicola rispetto a quella, perlomeno, di
tutti i poster abituali; tuttavia ciò  che  mi  è  stato  insegnato  è  più
complesso  di  quanto  scrive  Mary,  e  concorda con quello che leggo qui:
http://snipurl.com/gcwi
Son certo, peraltro, che Mary, vista la struttura della frase in questione,
si  riferisse  esclusivamente  all'uso  del  present  perfect  nella  forma
durativa (con for o since), la quale mi  pare  implicare  che  l'azione  si 
protragga almeno fino al momento esatto in cui la frase viene pronunciata.


 protragga almeno fino al momento esatto in cui la frase viene pronunciata.
Non al 100%, direi.


 protragga almeno fino al momento esatto in cui la frase viene pronunciata.
Questa frase non è corretta?
"I have had this girl for 4 years... Last month she dumped me, when she
found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still think of her."
-- 


 found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still think of her."
A me verrebbe da scrivere così:
"I  had  had  this  girl  for 4 years... Last month she dumped me, when she
found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still  think  of  her."
perché la vedo come:
"I had had this girl for 4 years, before she dumped me last month, when she
found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still  think  of  her."
Di più, nin zo.


 found out I'd been faking my Scottish accent. But I still  think  of  her."
I once rahng her op an' said: "Lüük at me an' say you don't love me any
more".
P.S. I recently found that for (some) Scots "look" is non pronounced [lUk],
but [lu:k]; with their [Y] kind of [u:].
[...]
Ciao, FB
-- 
Emily: "I'm going to Europe and I'm going to have a marvellous time. I'm
going to get up at ten and have two glasses of wine at lunch every single
day."
Richard: "Only prostitutes have two glasses of wine at lunch!"
(Gilmore Girls, 501)

 dubbi.
Ok, chiedo scusa, non sapevo esistessero autorità indiscutibili sulla Terra!
:-)
Hamlet

 Is this possible?
Uhm... qua ci vuole il simple past.
Tschuess,
Enrico il Pentolaio.
P.S. Sì, sono appena tornato dalla Scozia :-)