Level: intermediate
We use perfect aspect to look back from a specific time and talk about things up to that time or about things that are important at that time.
We use the present perfect to look back from the present:
I have always enjoyed working in Italy. [and I still do]
She has left home, so she cannot answer the phone.
We use the past perfect to look back from a time in the past:
It was 2006. I had enjoyed working in Italy for the past five years.
She had left home, so she could not answer the phone.
We use will with the perfect to look back from a time in the future:
By next year I will have worked in Italy for 15 years.
She will have left home by 8.30, so she will not be able to answer the phone.
Present perfect
We use the present perfect:
- for something that started in the past and continues in the present:
They've been married for nearly 50 years.
She has lived in Liverpool all her life.
- when we are talking about our experience up to the present:
I've seen that film before.
I've played the guitar ever since I was a teenager.
He has written three books and he is working on another one.
- for something that happened in the past but is important in the present:
I can't get in the house. I've lost my keys.
Teresa isn't at home. I think she has gone shopping.
We normally use the present perfect continuous to emphasise that something is still continuing in the present:
It's been raining for hours.
I'm tired out. I've been working all day.
Past perfect
We use the past perfect:
- for something that started in the past and continued up to a later time in the past:
When George died, he and Anne had been married for nearly 50 years.
She didn't want to move. She had lived in Liverpool all her life.
- when we are reporting our experience up to a point in the past:
My eighteenth birthday was the worst day I had ever had.
I was pleased to meet George. I hadn't met him before, even though I had met his wife several times.
- for something that happened in the past and is important at a later time in the past:
I couldn't get into the house. I had lost my keys.
Teresa wasn't at home. She had gone shopping.
We use the past perfect continuous to show that something started in the past and continued up to a time in the past or was important at that time in the past:
Everything was wet. It had been raining for hours.
He was a wonderful guitarist. He had been playing ever since he was a teenager.
Modals with the perfect
We use will with the perfect to show that something will be complete at or before some time in the future:
In a few years they will have discovered a cure for the common cold.
I can come out tonight. I'll have finished my homework by then.
We use would with the perfect to refer to something that did not happen in the past:
If you had asked me, I would have helped you.
I would have helped you, but you didn't ask me.
You didn't ask me or I would have helped you.
We use other modals with the perfect when we are looking back from a point in time. The point of time may be in the future:
We'll meet again next week. We might have finished the work by then.
I will phone at six o'clock. He should have got home by then.
or the present:
It's getting late. They should have arrived by now.
He's still not here. He must have missed his train.
or the past:
I wasn't feeling well. I must have eaten something bad.
I checked my mobile phone. She could have left a message.
- Perfect aspect 1
- Perfect aspect 2
- Perfect aspect 3
Hello ER,
You clearly understand these verb forms in general, but there are a few small points that aren't completely correct. First of all, 'since how long' sounds a little strange to me. I'd recommend saying just 'how long', which communicates the idea you want.
Second, in a question like 'How long have you had the flu?' (or the other two questions), it's the verb form (present perfect simple or present perfect continuous) that communicates the idea of a time period beginning in the past that has a connection with the present. (You could use 'how long' to speak only about the past, e.g. 'How long did the First World War last?')
Third, it's not impossible for a stative verb to be used in a continuous form -- it's just unusual. We can still use a continuous form to communicate one of its common meanings, e.g. to describe something changing or developing: 'I'm loving the new TV series'. In this example, the TV series is still not complete and my use of the continuous could be showing this, or it could be showing that I'm surprised that I'm liking it (it's something new for me to enjoy this kind of programme). But most of the time we'd just say 'I love the new TV series'.
So you are right in thinking that sentence 2 above isn't correct, at least in most situations. It could be correct in a very specific context, but in general we wouldn't use it.
Sentences 1 and 3 are correct.
I hope this helps you understand these finer points.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Samin,
'would have been' is sometimes called the conditional perfect tense. Our grammar doesn't use this term, but you can read more about this form on our 'would' and 'would have', Modals with 'have' and Conditionals 2 pages.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Satinder,
Whether the past simple or the past perfect is better will depend upon the context in which the sentences are used. Without knowing the broader context I can only say that both sentences are grammatically possible.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Charneet
In the first pair of sentences, the first one is correct since it refers to a period of time the speaker is still in (the past year). The second is not correct.
In the second pair of sentences, the first one is correct and the second is not. In the second sentence, if you changed 'last year' to 'the year before', then it would be correct.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Charneet kaur,
The sentence
I have been working on this project
is perfectly fine. That's not to say that it necessarily makes sense in a given context, but there's nothing grammatically wrong with it. In context, you might need to add how long you've been working on the project, for example, but that's not a grammar issue.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello MarcoDeAngeli
When we use a modal with the perfect, the perfect part ('have' + past participle) never changes. This is a very common mistake. I'd suggest you remember that 'could' is really the verb that agrees with the subject. Since 'could' is a modal, it doesn't take the final -s, but if it were a simple present perfect, it would 'She has left a message', where the verb 'have' is the one that agrees with the subject 'she'.
I hope that helps you remember it, but if you find it more confusing, please ignore what I said!
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Mersi
Although there is a verb 'to marry', it is rarely used. More often we use the adjective 'married' with the verb 'to be' or 'to get'.
The expression used here is 'to be married'. So the verb 'be' is in the past perfect ('had been') and the adjective doesn't change form.
Does that make sense?
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello jessicacopat
The first one is speaking about the present time, or events perceived as connected to the present. The second one is speaking about a past time.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Peppy
Both are grammatically correct. 2 is more likely when you begin speaking about this topic, whereas 1 would be more likely after you'd already spoken about various things that were stolen, or to emphasise that nothing at all was left.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Dayan,
The first one is correct:. You could also say this:
I haven't seen John for years.
I noticed you posted the same comment twice. There is always a delay between writing a comment and it appearing because all comments are moderated (checked) before they are published so we can get rid of spam advertising. There is no need to post comments multiple times.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello redream
The first sentence is correct but the last two are not -- neither 'whole her life' nor 'her life all' are correct.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello sam61
The first one is correct. When there is subject-verb inversion, only the auxiliary verb (in this case, 'should') moves.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello manuel24,
'Must have' tells us that the speaker does not know the reason why they feel unwell, and is speculating. We use perfect modal verbs to speculate about the past in this way. If the speaker was sure then the past perfect (I had eaten) could be used, as you say.
You can read more about modal verbs in the appropriate grammar section:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar/modal-verbs
We also have pages about deduction in the present
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/intermediate-grammar/modals-deduction-present
and in the past
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/intermediate-grammar/modals-deduction-past
Peter
The Learn English Team
Hi simbu
'What is the most precious gift in this world?' is what comes to my mind, but I'm afraid it's difficult to say whether your version is correct without knowing what you want to say.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello wedyan,
I'm afraid almost all of those sentences have errors in them.
I think you're trying to do too much at once here. You have many different verb forms on this page, which is designed not to teach all of them at the same time, but as a reference to summarise them for learners who have already studied each of them individually.
My advice to you is to not try to learn so many different forms at the same time. Build your language knowledge up step by step so that you have solid foundations. That way the more advanced forms, such as present and past perfect continuous, will be easier to grasp.
Looking at the level of your language in these sentences I think I would recommend these two series to you:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/learnenglish-podcasts/series-01-episode-01
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/word-street
Each of these combines listening work with language work and I think they will help you to build up your English step by step.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello cbenglish,
Both sentences are grammatically possible.
The present perfect (have been) tells the reader that this is a practice which has continued up to the present time and suggests (without stating with certainty) that it may be about to change or be in the process of changing.
The present simple (are) does not carry this suggestion.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello manuel24,
That is correct. In my answer I said 'the present perfect suggests (without stating with certainty) that it may be about to change or be in the process of changing', which means that it may not be permanent/may be temporary. Normally a continuous form would be used, but the verb 'be' is generally not used with continuous aspect.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello manuel24,
No, the original sentence is present perfect simple. I was confusing your question with a different question I was answering from another user. My apologies! I will edit the reply to avoid confusion.
Normally, the present perfect continuous suggests an action was temporary, as you say. For example:
I've been living in Paris for two years. [it's a temporary situation]
I've lived in Paris for two years. [Paris is my home]
However, in the original sentence we have the verb 'be' and we rarely use this with continuous aspect. Thus, have been is used.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello manuel24,
I'm not sure which comments you mean but I'm not aware of any being deleted. Maintenance work is performed on the site all the time, however.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi seelan65,
The pronoun 'it' in the sentence you ask about is often called a 'dummy subject', because it doesn't really refer to anything. If you follow the link, you can see a fuller explanation of this with a variety of examples.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team