# Present perfect for present states



## SwissJeremy

I know that present perfect it commonly used to describe present states in sentences like:
 
The weather has changed(=it is different now) / He has died(= he’s dead now) / He has come(= he is here) or He has arrived(= he’s here) / The rain has stopped(it’s not raining anymore) but is it also common in American English to use the present perfect in sentences like this: 
 
He has fallen asleep(to tell my wife my son is asleep now) / He has gotten up!(to tell my wife my son is awake now) or He has woken up!(to tell my wife my son is awake now)? He has flipped over(to tell my wife my son is lying on his belly now) 
 
Or is the simple past there the preference? Thanks for your help!


----------



## dg_spain

Hello, SwissJeremy:

The present perfect is used in the sentences you give because the action began in the past, but continues in the present (of the sentences). If you used the simple past, you would be talking about something that happened in the past, and was finished.


----------



## SwissJeremy

So also in AE it's mendatory to use the present perfect in sentences like: "he has fallen asleep" or "he has woken up" to say that is awake or asleep now?


----------



## dg_spain

It depends on what you want to say. You can say "He's awake" or "He's asleep" to describe the condition of someone in the present. You can say, "He fell asleep while watching TV" or "He woke up at 7 a.m." to indicate exactly when the action happened. The use of the present perfect is to indicate that something happened in the past which continues into the present time.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thank you! Therefore, to ask if my son is awake or a sleep I have to say: Has he gotten up? or Has he woken up? or Has he fallen asleep? and not Did he get up? Did he wake up? or Did he fall asleep? Is it like that?


----------



## dg_spain

Hello again--this is going to get complicated (you'd be better off checking a grammar book or grammar information on this page or others, actually!) but here's a little bit more information.

Normally the three questions you are posing would be in the past simple. You want to know if that action _happened_, not if it is still going on. The act of waking up or falling asleep does not continue into the present--the _condition_ (of being awake or asleep)continues, but the verb of waking up or falling asleep does not.

An exception would be that you would ask, "Has he fallen asleep yet?" the answer to which might be either "Yes, he _fell asleep_ about 10 minutes ago." or "No, he_'s_ still awake" or "No, he _hasn't_."


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thank you, it’s really hard to understand for me though. Because my examples mentioned at the beginning they also refer to something what happened in the past like Has he died? (asked is the condition: meaning is he dead now but the action also doesn’t continue in the present) same for Has he come?(condition is asked: Is he here now. Not if he still continues to come) or has the rain stopped?(condition is requested: Is it not raining anymore? Not does it still stop at the moment) Can you try to explain what makes the difference between these sentences and the ones with waking up and falling asleep? Thanks a lot!


----------



## dg_spain

No difference, SwissJeremy, I just used two of your examples, not all, sorry if it confused you! I would not ask "Has he died?" although I might ask "Has he died yet?"; otherwise, it would also be "Did he die."

The sentences with "come" are harder, since the "yet" is implied, we might use the present perfect. To be safe, use the present perfect with "yet" and you will be okay.

The "rain stopping" is a case (language is not perfectly regulable!) where we MAY use the present perfect, even in declarative sentences: "The rain has stopped."

I hope this clears up some doubts--I have read and written very quickly on this one, so I'll excuse myself in advance for any error! Have to get back to my translation...


----------



## SwissJeremy

any other explanations?


----------



## ausland

Has he gotten up? (Has he gotten out of the bed or is he still in the bed?)
Has he woken up?  (Is he awake or is he still sleeping?)
Has he fallen asleep? (Is he asleep or is he still lying in the bed awake?)
Did he get up? (You are asking in the past whether someone got out of bed)
Did he wake up? (In the past, you are wondering if he woke up.)
Did he fall asleep? (Again, in the past you are wondering whether he fell asleep)


----------



## SwissJeremy

So if I want to describe the present condition like it want to tell my wife my son is awake now after he slept. I have to say: “Honey, he has gotten up!” or “Honey, he has woke up” the same for the opposite “Honey, he has fallen asleep!” (meaning = Now his sleeping) ?
Furthermore would you ask: “has he died?” (is he dead?) or “did he die” (is he dead now?)
 
I really appreciate your comments! Thanks!


----------



## sound shift

With respect, the examples you provide do not illustrate the problem very well, Jeremy. I would use adjectives rather than verbs in all three examples.

In the first example, I would say "He's awake (now)."
In the second, I would say "He's asleep (now)."
In the third, I would say "Is he still alive?"


----------



## SwissJeremy

Okay your right about that. J but let’s say I’m holding my son(baby) in my arms and I enter the room were my wife stays. My baby cried before and now he’s sleeping: Would you say then: “Honey, he’s fallen asleep!” or “Honey, he fell asleep” ?


----------



## sound shift

Well, I wouldn't say "Honey"  but I would say "He's fallen asleep". I speak BE; AE speakers may take a different line on this.


----------



## SwissJeremy

AE speaker(ausland) what's your opinion?


----------



## HistofEng

SwissJeremy said:


> Okay your right about that. J but let’s say I’m holding my son(baby) in my arms and I enter the room were my wife stays. My baby cried before and now he’s sleeping: Would you say then: “Honey, he’s fallen asleep!” or “Honey, he fell asleep” ?




Either one works fine for me in this situation  (the same for 'to wake up').


----------



## SwissJeremy

Which would you prefer? Which do you think is more common in the mentioned case?
What about: Did he die? or Has he died?(to ask if his dead or not)


----------



## ausland

These questions have no good answer.

*He has fallen asleep.*
The perfect tense just means that he was awake last time you checked but now he is sleeping.

*He fell asleep.*
The past tense means he fell asleep at some point in the past and he may or may not still be sleeping.  The present and future is not implied here.  However, he may still be asleep or he may be awake.  That is not the point here.  The main focus is the fact that at some time in the past, he fell asleep.


----------



## ausland

If you want to know if someone died, you would probably just ask if the person is dead.  However, depending on the background and whether you are possibly asking politely, you might say it a different way.  There isn't one correct way.  It's a matter of style and meaning.

Did he die?  -- Means that perhaps you heard a story of someone having an illness or injury in the past which could lead to death that happened in the past as well.

Has he died? -- Means that you might be expecting someone to die but last time you checked, he was still alive.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thank you so in that case I think you'd prefer "Honey, finally he has fallen asleep" In the mentioned case before, right? (I’m holding my son(baby) in my arms and I enter the room were my wife stays. My baby cried before and now he’s sleeping: Would you say then: “Honey, finally he’s fallen asleep!” or “Honey, finally he fell asleep”) right?


----------



## ausland

Either one...
But I would say...

Honey, he’s finally fallen asleep!
Honey, he finally fell asleep!


----------



## SwissJeremy

but when I say: He has finally fallen asleep! The focus is on that he's sleeping right now, right?


----------



## liliput

The present perfect is used in your example sentences because you are talking about something that has *just* happened. If, for example, your son was awake a very short time ago and is now asleep, you would say "he's fallen asleep". 

"He has died" does not mean simply "he is dead now" but also "he was alive a very short time ago". In most cases, we would simply say "he is dead". If he died some time ago, then we would say "he died this morning/last night/in 1986/etc".


----------



## losvedir

liliput said:


> The present perfect is used in your example sentences because you are talking about something that has *just* happened. If, for example, your son was awake a very short time ago and is now asleep, you would say "he's fallen asleep".
> 
> "He has died" does not mean simply "he is dead now" but also "he was alive a very short time ago". In most cases, we would simply say "he is dead". If he died some time ago, then we would say "he died this morning/last night/in 1986/etc".



Ah, I agree with this! This seems like a good way to decide whether to say "he fell asleep" or "he's fallen asleep".


----------



## johndot

My view, in a nutshell, is this (some previous posters have alluded to these rules, but have not, I think, stressed their importance sufficiently):
 
When you use the present perfect you never state the time of the action—nor do you imply it, not even loosely. Therefore,
 
_he has fallen asleep at 7p.m._
_he has fallen asleep just now_
_he has fallen asleep as I watched_
_he has fallen asleep earlier this afternoon_
 
are wrong: the bits in blue are specific, even if imprecise, times.
 
And the other simple rule regarding the present perfect, as several members have said, is that the result of the action continues: the child is still asleep.
 
In other words, if the speaker wants to include a time-frame, or if the child is no longer asleep, then another verb-tense would have to be used.
 
(I’m aware that there are situations where the first of the four examples above can be legitimately used—_but not as a stand-alone phrase.)_


----------



## SwissJeremy

I've got to tell you guys that I'm quite confused now! Can I use now present perfect or past simple in AE or only present perfect in the given example?

"but let’s say I’m holding my son(baby) in my arms and I enter the room were my wife stays. My baby cried before and now he’s sleeping: Would you say then: “Honey, he’s fallen asleep!” or “Honey, he fell asleep” ?"

there my son was awake just a moment ago and cried but now he's sleeping.


----------



## losvedir

SwissJeremy said:


> I've got to tell you guys that I'm quite confused now! Can I use now present perfect or past simple in AE or only present perfect in the given example?
> 
> "but let’s say I’m holding my son(baby) in my arms and I enter the room were my wife stays. My baby cried before and now he’s sleeping: Would you say then: “Honey, he’s fallen asleep!” or “Honey, he fell asleep” ?"
> 
> there my son was awake just a moment ago and cried but now he's sleeping.



Okay, I've gone over this in my head for several minutes now, and even went into my room to play-act the whole scenario. Here's what I've discovered about how it "feels": (Keep in mind I'm not too good with grammar.)

"He's asleep" is definitely the most natural thing to say. 

I could also see myself whispering, "Okay, he's fallen asleep". To me that means (in contrast to "he's asleep") I went into the other room specifically to comfort him, and emerged with the sleeping baby shortly after he fell asleep.

"He fell asleep" felt a little more abrupt to me. When I went into the other room to put my imaginary baby to sleep, and then came out holding it in my arms, and reported "he fell asleep", it sounded a little too much like it was just some task I had accomplished. Somehow or another changing the tense to "he's fallen" softened it a bit, and made it more personal.

The difference is very slight, though, and may not even be really there. It's kind of hard to say, since the most natural thing for me to say is "he's asleep".


----------



## HistofEng

To me, in the situation, I am likely to say either "He fell asleep" or "He's fallen asleep"

He fell asleep - could mean he fell asleep just now or 4 hours ago.

He has fallen asleep - means he  fell asleep_ just_ now.

Both of these sentences sound totally natural _in the situation you described_.
You keep asking what people would actually say in your example, but both sound great in the situation you described.  I would say either one, which ever came to my mind first.


----------



## Forero

I don't see any difference in how recently he fell asleep between "he fell asleep" and "he has fallen asleep".  Once he has fallen asleep, I can always say "He has fallen asleep".  There is no time limit.

"He has fallen asleep" does not mean quite the same as "He's asleep (now)", which is what I probably would say in the context given, but "He fell asleep" does not fit the context as I see it because "fell" is an action or a change of state in the past, whereas what we want to say is something about the present.

_He fell asleep._
It happened. It's over ... or at least it _was_ over.]
_
He has fallen asleep._
At this time (now) he has in his history (at least) one more transition from awake to asleep.  We can probably surmise that he is still asleep.
_
He is asleep._
His current state is "asleep".  It is not a big stretch to presume that he has fallen asleep naturally and is getting some rest now.

Adverbials of time with present perfect usually do not refer to the time of the participle but to the time of the "having", which is the present. "He has fallen asleep just now" is not an impossible sentence, but it would be unusual. Different context can make a lot of difference. There is nothing strange about saying "Every day this week he has fallen asleep at 7p.m."  Of course, that's not really a specific time in the past but a series of specific times in the present.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thank you so much! I think I got it! J Just to make sure, it also applies for the other examples like: “Look, he has flipped over!” (he’s lying on his belly now) or “He has gotten up / He has woken up”(when I heard a sound from my son’s room and I want to tell my wife the our son is awake now) or when my wife is asking me: “how is your father?” “He has died!!!”(He’s dead now)


----------



## Forero

Hi, SwissJeremy.

It is difficult to be precise about what distinguishes present perfect from simple past and present.  There is overlap in the meanings, and even a specific context does not resolve everything 100%.  The contrast between _died_ and _dead_ is a clue, the fact that present perfect is present, not past, is another.  A lot comes from usage rather than simple rules.  There must be some reason present perfect seems odd in this context but past tense too blunt.  I want to give you a good answer, but I need some time to think it over.


----------



## berndf

I would describe the demarcation of past tense from present perfect as follows: Present perfect may refer to a past action but the state created by this past action has to persist to the present while the past tense makes no implications. If it has stopped raining two hours ago and the weather is still dry you can say both “it stopped raining” and “it has stopped raining”. If, on the other hand, it has restarted to rain one hour ago you can still say “It stopped raining” but you cannot say “it has stopped raining” any more.

The demarcation of present perfect from the description of a present state (“has died” vs. “is dead”), I see as follows: Consider the sentences “the door is open” and “the door has been opened”. Both imply that the door is now open. In addition, the sentence “the door has been opened” implies that the door was shut in the past and that someone opened it at some point in time. The sentence “the door is open”, on the other hand, makes no such implication. It could very well be that the door is open because it was never shut.


----------



## ausland

To make matters worse, these two tenses are often used incorrectly by native speakers.


----------



## SaveTheManatees

I don't know how much I can add to this thread, but if I were to walk into a room and show my spouse I would say "Look, Honey, he finally fell asleep". To me "He finally fell asleep" sounds more American and "He's finally fallen asleep" sounds more British.

Until I can get into a good college grammar class, I just go with what my ear tells me. Usually.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thank you, what do you think about the examples like: The train has arrived. / He's come home / the rain has stopped /Has he died?

They also describe a present codition, is there a difference with "He's fallen a sleep" ? or would you also use the simple past?


----------



## johndot

If it has stopped raining two hours ago and the weather is still dry you can say both “it stopped raining” and “it has stopped raining”. If, on the other hand, it has restarted to rain one hour ago you can still say “It stopped raining” but you cannot say “it has stopped raining” any more. (berndf, post #32 (extract))
 
I’m sorry, berndf, but you have used the wrong tense to arrive at the right conclusions! Each sentence opens with a phrase in the present perfect, _but then you specify the time when it happened (simple past),_ and I maintain that this cannot work, as I tried to explain in my earlier post (#25).
 
If you say to someone “It has stopped raining,” you will probably be answered with a smile and “Oh, good,” or “At last—now I can go out.”
 
But if you say “It has stopped raining two hours ago,” the likely reaction will be a puzzled frown and “Pardon?” or “I’m sorry?”


----------



## berndf

johndot said:


> If it has stopped raining two hours ago and the weather is still dry you can say both “it stopped raining” and “it has stopped raining”. If, on the other hand, it has restarted to rain one hour ago you can still say “It stopped raining” but you cannot say “it has stopped raining” any more.


 
Is that better?


----------



## johndot

Ja, genau! Exactly right!


----------



## berndf

If you try to explain such subtleties you shouldn't be sloppy with your own grammar. Point taken.


----------



## SaveTheManatees

SwissJeremy said:


> Thank you, what do you think about the examples like: The train has arrived. / He's come home / the rain has stopped /Has he died?
> 
> They also describe a present codition, is there a difference with "He's fallen a sleep" ? or would you also use the simple past?



If I were at the train station waiting for the train or telling someone who was about to get on, I would definitely say "The train has arrived", because it means the train is still there. "He's come home" is the same, he came home and he is still there. "The rain has stopped" and hasn't started again.

As for "has he died", I think about it like this: "Did he die?" sounds like a you're talking about a specific event. As in, "he fell off the roof!" or "he caught pneumonia". 
"Did he die?"

"Has he died" implies that you're asking about a general time frame, starting from the last time you knew he was alive until the present.


I hope that helped and didn't just make things more confusing.


----------



## se16teddy

I am daring to post because I think the basic rules are not that different between UK and US English. 

I can't help thinking we're making a mountain out of a molehill here. 

Principle 1 The present tense tells you something about the present (sometimes including a bit of the past and a bit of the future e.g. _I live in London.) _So _He is dead _says nothing about the past: he may (at least metaphorically) never have been alive. If _he is asleep _he may (at least metaphorically) never have been awake.

Principle 2 The present perfect says something about the past and something about the present. If it is the present perfect continuous it is something that happened in the past and is continuing in the present. _He has been sleeping. _If it is the 'simple' present perfect it is something that happened in the past and has a consequence or resonance in the present. _He has fallen asleep. _

Principle 3 The present consequence or resonance that is implied by the present perfect is determined by the context. Thus
- _The baby has fallen asleep _may imply that the baby is now asleep. 
- _The security guard has fallen asleep _may imply that my property is now at risk. It is a matter of supreme indifference to me whether the security guard is now asleep. 
- _I have fallen asleep _may imply _I am awake now, but I know what it is like to fall asleep. _

(PS inspired by dg's following post: The area where these basic principles break down is where, especially in British English I think, even where we have no particular present consequence in mind we use the present perfect to emphasize that an event happened in the recent past (maybe because the recent past inevitably has consequences in the present: _I have just gone_). But the original question did not ask about this complication.)


----------



## dg_spain

But again, one might use the present perfect in all those situations...if they had _just happened_. If your brother, for example, came home at 4 p.m. and you are telling someone else (over the phone, for example) at 8 p.m. that that person had come home, would you say "he's come home"? I don't think it would be normal, even if he is still home. It is an event that passed, and 4 hours later I would certainly be more inclined to say "he came home". 

If 4 hours after my son fell asleep my husband called and asked, "is the baby still awake?" I would not say, "no, he's fallen asleep", even if the baby is still sleeping. I would say "he's asleep" or "no, he fell asleep."

p.s. I see this has coincided with se16Teddy's post--I agree that this is going on and on, and would point out again that language is rarely if never as precise as a language-learner might want...but the rules on the use of the present perfect can be found in most grammar or language books!


----------



## Forero

Most grammar books that I have seen that treat English verb usage include various "rules" that to me don't account for the tenses and aspects as educated natives really use them in speaking and writing.

The three principles Se16teddy has given us are the closest I have seen to workable rules for usage as I know it.  I think principle 3 is especially applicable to the present context.  Principle 3 may sound wishy-washy and unsatisfying to a person looking for a concise, universal "litmus test" for present perfect, but I believe it is accurate and useful.

I'll explain my answers with extensive context, and  I hope it will be evident how the three principles apply.

"The baby has fallen asleep" is logical to be sure, but it is not quite what the spouse wants/needs to know.  It does not unequivocably say that the baby is asleep, though it does come closer to expressing that than does "The baby fell asleep", at least under normal circumstances.

Unless it is especially important to me or my wife whether he is currently on his back or on his belly, talking about his current position or about his  movements since we last checked have close to equal usefulness to me, so the slight ambiguity in "Look, he (has) flipped over!" does not matter to me.

For "He has gotten up", I would be more likely to say "He got up" or "He's up", depending on whether I think he should be sleeping or starting his day.

Death of a relative can be a rather touchy subject.  We want to minimize the shock if we can, but we do want to be clear.

When my younger brother died, I remember my mother's words well: "Put down your suitcase and sit down.  Fulano [not his real name] had an accident, and he's dead."  I said, "What?" but then I realized I had understood quite well.  I replayed her words in my mind and wondered why she hadn't said "has been in an auto accident" or used different words than "he's dead."  Then I realized that she is a frank person and knows I am, and it was important to be clear and not to linger over words in such circumstances.  And she might not have been able to finish the sentence had she tried to say it differently.

When my older brother died, his wife called and said, "This is Linda.  Ferraro died this morning."  (She of course used the real first names.)  As with my mother's statement, I understood and appreciated the simple language. 

On the other hand, a farmer might say to his wife "It looks like one of our mules has died."  The issue here would be economics and logistics more than personal grief, so this sentence in this context would be quite natural.

What I have seen of the difference between American and British tense usage is a type of sentence that to a Brit clearly calls for present perfect as the only logical choice but for which an American tends to choose simple past.  To the American, the present perfect is certainly logical but interferes with the flow of the sentence and is not required for clarity.


----------



## SwissJeremy

dg_spain said:


> But again, one might use the present perfect in all those situations...if they had _just happened_. If your brother, for example, came home at 4 p.m. and you are telling someone else (over the phone, for example) at 8 p.m. that that person had come home, would you say "he's come home"? I don't think it would be normal, even if he is still home. It is an event that passed, and 4 hours later I would certainly be more inclined to say "he came home".
> 
> If 4 hours after my son fell asleep my husband called and asked, "is the baby still awake?" I would not say, "no, he's fallen asleep", even if the baby is still sleeping. I would say "he's asleep" or "no, he fell asleep."
> 
> p.s. I see this has coincided with se16Teddy's post--I agree that this is going on and on, and would point out again that language is rarely if never as precise as a language-learner might want...but the rules on the use of the present perfect can be found in most grammar or language books!


 

Thank you, for your aswer. I think it makes things clearer. In this case would you say: "Look, he's woken up" or "Look, he's gotten up" right after your son woke up? Because it was metioned that "He's fallen asleep" would be used but "Look, he's gotten up" not. Where is the difference there?


----------



## dg_spain

Forero said:


> For "He has gotten up", I would be more likely to say "He got up" or "He's up", depending on whether I think he should be sleeping or starting his day.


 
As Forero said, he would be _more likely to say_.... So many times the choice can be correct either way but feels "better" to a native speaker for some reason. I also feel that the most natural way to express this is "he's up"--somehow the going to sleep feels like a longer, gentler process (well, with a baby, it depends!)  that can be expressed more easily with the present perfect than "getting up". 

You could use "he has got(ten) up" when it has just recently happened perfectly well, but it's probably not the most common way to express what happened, at least among native speakers.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Okay, but do you think if I just stick to the simple past for cases like: “He fell asleep” / “He just got up” / “He died” / “He flipped over” and for case like “He has come home” / “train has arrived” / “the rain has stopped” (because there it just seems somehow mandatory to us the present perfect in the given examples) I will not be wrong and cause some misunderstandings with native US speakers?


----------



## dg_spain

I think you will be fine using the forms like that, and that you will be understood very well. It is also true that to simplify some of these cases, you can always just use "just", as you did in one of your examples. "The train just arrived" covers what the present perfect implies. "The rain just stopped" also. 

As in se16Teddy's point number 2, "If it is the 'simple' present perfect it is something that happened in the past and has a consequence or resonance in the present. _He has fallen asleep. " _It is when you need to show clearly that something is continuing that you really have to use the present perfect ("we have written several posts each in this forum..."!)


----------



## SwissJeremy

Thanks but, know now: As in se16Teddy's point number 2, "If it is the 'simple' present perfect it is something that happened in the past and has a consequence or resonance in the present. _He has fallen asleep. " __That’s exactly the point I didn’t really get till now, because: “He's gotten up” has a clear consequence for me -> he’s awake now "he's woken up" -> He's awake now_
_As well as “He’s fallen asleep” -> he’s asleep now._

_But still the majority of the US speaker would rather prefer the simple past, right? __J_


----------



## dg_spain

Yes, I think so, and I think that preference goes back to the question of the action vs. the condition. 

Maybe I am trying too hard to make an example fit, but to me it would feel more normal to say "he has awoken" (which we do not say, just because we don't use that verb normally) or "he has arisen" (much used in Christian religions), and where the _action itself continues_ because he is still awake or up, than "he has gotten up", where the action seems to me to me shorter--you wake up, you get up (the moment of rising from your bed), and you start your day.


----------



## SwissJeremy

So you feel like an action has to take a “while” Like “the train has arrived” or “he has fallen asleep” that it’s common to use present perfect, and if it takes just moment like “I woke up” or “he got up” “he flipped over” you’d rather use the simple past!  Right?


----------



## dg_spain

I THINK so. I would need a bit more time to think about other examples, etc....and right now I cannot. However, I'm sure other members will say if they think it's so--or not!!


----------



## se16teddy

dg_spain said:


> I .. would point out again that language is rarely if never as precise as a language-learner might want...


I disagree: I think that the rules of grammar, even relatively tricky ones like rules of aspect, are capable of precise definition (though of course they vary from place to place even within a single language like English or German). The problem is that different languages catalogue the world in quite different ways: the challenge for the language learner is to get your head around such very fundamental differences, because the differences affect thought as well as language - to speak a different language, you have to apply a different thought process to analysing experience.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Do other member agree on this: "So you feel like an action has to take a “while” Like “the train has arrived” or “he has fallen asleep” that it’s common to use present perfect, and if it takes just moment like “I woke up” or “he got up” “he flipped over” you’d rather use the simple past! Right?"


----------



## johndot

Do other member agree on this: "So you feel like an action has to take a “while” (SwissJeremy, post #53)
 
No. The duration of time is irrelevant: in any case, a “while” can be any length of time—a millennium or a millisecond, whatever the author has in mind.
 
The whole purpose of using the present perfect is to close the subject and move on, into the present or future:
 
“He has fallen asleep (that’s the end of that subject), and now I’ll go and read a book.”


----------



## sound shift

johndot said:


> Do other member agree on this: "So you feel like an action has to take a “while” (SwissJeremy, post #53)
> 
> No. The duration of time is irrelevant: in any case, a “while” can be any length of time—a millennium or a millisecond, whatever the author has in mind.
> 
> The whole purpose of using the present perfect is to close the subject and move on, into the present or future:
> 
> “He has fallen asleep (that’s the end of that subject), and now I’ll go and read a book.”



I agree. If the train came into the station, stopped, took on passengers and left, you would not say "the train has arrived", because it has moved on. You would say "The train arrived" (simple past) on time but left slightly late/left five minutes ago/has just gone/etc." But if you look up and see the Birmingham train at a platform which was empty the last time you looked, you say "The Birmingham train has arrived": it has not moved on.


----------



## SwissJeremy

I think maybe it's a difference between US and UK English, and maybe the US people feel like an action need to take longer then just  a moment that they would use the present perfect, or how would you explain that many AE speaker said that would rahter use simple past in sentences like "he got up" or "he woke up" some even for "he has fallen asleep" but they would also use "he has arrived" / "the rain has stopped" or "he has come home"`?


----------



## sound shift

You are right. There is a BE/AE difference here. It is discussed in numerous WR threads.


----------



## SwissJeremy

Do you know a thread or a website where the AE usage is explained very well? Because for me it's just quite hard what kind of rules the AE speakers follow?(Sometimes it doesn't seems logical acc. to the given rules and in the grammarbooks mostly there are the UK ruels and than it's written AE have very different ruels for the usage but it's not properly explain how!)


----------

