Perfect aspect

Hello Lal,

Yes, those sentences are all grammatically correct. Which is better will depend upon your intention and the context in which you use them. The present perfect simple and continuous forms are often both possible and differ not in fact but in emphasis.

We have a page dealing with just this issue. You can find it here.

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team

Hi Lal,

The first and third ones are correct.

All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team

Hi learning,

Both of these can be correct, but it really depends on the context. We're happy to help you understand these forms if you can provide us with the context or you can also read more about these forms on our present perfect and past perfect pages.

All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team

Hello Hiroko,

Both of those sentences are grammatically correct.

When we say 'Someone has already played...' we are talking about some time in the past during the person's life. It tells us that the person has the experience of playing.

When we say 'I'm playing soccer now' we are talking about the current moment - the moment of speaking.

Play is most often used in English to describe participating in games (e.g. chess, cards, board games, computer games) and sports involving a ball (e.g. football, billiards, rugby). We use other verbs for different activities. For example, for activities which involve movement or travel we use go (e.g. go skiing, go running, go horse riding, go cycling), while for activities which focus on the use of the body we use do (e.g. do karate, do boxing, do yoga).

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team

Hi Toan,

In sentence 1, the time reference for the verb is brackets is the future time when you're staying at home to check the delivery, which is why the present perfect or simple past works there.

In sentence 2, the time reference for the verb is the time that the sentence is spoken, so the future perfect form is correct there.

Does that make sense?

All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team

Hi SonuKumar,

Thanks for clarifying that. 'have eaten' is not really correct because it clearly refers to a past action that is already finished, since other events have occurred after it (the worship, for example). And if you use the past simple for 'eat', then the present perfect doesn't work in the subordinate clause beginning with 'after'. Also, 'do worship' isn't a collocation in standard English.

In other words, I'd recommend 'Did you eat anything after you worshipped?' In English, worship if often referred to by another word. For example, in a Catholic context, one would say 'after mass'. In a Protestant context, it would be 'after church' or 'after the service'. I've seen some reference to 'after prayer' in Muslim contexts. Something like this would be more natural than 'after your worshipped'.

All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team

Hello SonuKumar,

Could you please write the sentences or phrases that you are asking about inside speech marks ('like this') or in brackets (like this)? That would help us understand your question better.

Also, when you say 'Have you had something', are you referring to food? I don't quite understand what you mean without the context.

Thanks in advance.

All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team

Hello Sanuzoku,

Generally speaking, the perfect forms are used to describe a time period which has not yet finished (present perfect) or a time which had not yet finished at a point in the past (past perfect).

For example, the differences between the sentences you quote are as follows:

1. It was the best meal I've had all week
2. It was the best meal I had all that week.

In sentence 1 we understand that the week has not finished. You might say this, for example, on Friday and so you can still have more meals before the week finishes. The perfect form here has the meaning of 'up to now' or 'so far'. It describes an unfinished time.

In sentence 2 the week is finished. You are talking about last week, or you are speaking late on Saturday evening (if we say Saturday is the last day of the week) and know that there will be no more meals before the end of the week. The past simple here has the meaning of 'then' or 'in the past'. It describes a time which is finished, over and complete.

1. I've got milk
2. I got the milk.

The difference here is how we see the actions. In the first sentence we see getting the milk as something which is still part of the present (still part of an unfinished time). You might have just come back from the shop and have the milk in hand, for example. In some way the information is news to the person you are speaking to - perhaps they are making coffee and don't know that there is milk in the fridge, for example.

In the second sentence getting the milk is done and is no longer part of the present. Perhaps you don't want to go to the shop again and are telling them about the milk to show that it is their turn now. Or perhaps you are arguing about who should pay for something else.

It's hard to be certain without knowing the context, but these are some likely uses of each form.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean in your second question by 'perfect counterparts for the perfect aspect'. Perhaps you can explain or provide an example.

The perfect aspect is difficult because there are many languages which have no equivalent, including the Polish language, and because it is usually a choice for the speaker, not something which must be used. There is often a choice of using a perfect form or something else, and our choice depends on what we want to emphasise. This makes it very difficult to grasp through rules. However, the more you read and listen to English then more you will develop a sense of when the perfect form is appropriate, even without explicit rules. After all, native speakers of English (or any other language) do not generally think about grammatical rules when speaking or writing. Instead they rely on a sense of what is appropriate for a given context and intention.

Best wishes,

Peter

The LearnEnglish Team