# we did not meet for a few years



## lingkky

We did not meet for a few years.

Can "did not" here be used other than "have not" in the sentence?is it natural and correct ?


----------



## e2efour

_Did not_ seems ok, although in your sentence I would probably start with _For several/a few years.

Have not_ has a different meaning to _did not _since it takes you up to the present. _Did not_ refers to the past.


----------



## lingkky

e2efour said:


> _Did not_ seem ok, although in your sentence I would probably start with _For several/a few years.
> 
> Have not_ has a different meaning to _did not _since it takes you up to the present. _Did not_ refers to the past.


Which sentence is more suitable to be used when I recommend my old friends to others?

"His name is Jame.He is my old friend and we have not met for several years."
Or
"His name is Jame.He is my old friend and we did not meet for several years."


----------



## Franco-filly

"He's my/an old friend but we *have not* met for several years" if you haven't seem him at all.
"He's my/an old friend but we *did not* meet for several years, until I bumped into him last October" i.e. if you have met him subsequently.


----------



## lingkky

I was happy to meet my friend just now.We haven't meet for several years.

Does “haven't meet " work if I just met my friend already?
Would it be wrong by not using "did not meet" in that context?


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> I was happy to meet my friend just now.We haven't meet for several years.
> 
> Does “haven't *met* " work if I just met my friend already?
> Would it be wrong by not using "did not *met*" in that context?


"We didn't meet for several years" is also fine, because you are free to regard "just now" as a present or as a past time for the purpose of the present perfect. You can also use the past perfect, because *not meeting* happened before *meeting*.


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> "We didn't meet for several years" is also fine, because you are free to regard "just now" as a present or as a past time for the purpose of the present perfect. You can also use the past perfect, because *not meeting* happened before *meeting*.


I met him yesterday. We haven't meet for some years.

Does this work if the last meeting was on yesterday? ?


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> I met him yesterday. We haven't *met *for some years.
> 
> Does this work if the last meeting was on yesterday? ?



Yes. 24 hours is a short time compared with "some years". You can regard a meeting yesterday as happening in "the present" and use the present perfect.

Of course, in the present continuous tense the "present" is a stricter idea. You cant say "we are meeting" of a meeting that finished yesterday.


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> Yes. 24 hours is a short time compared with "some years". You can regard a meeting yesterday as happening in "the present" and use the present perfect.
> 
> Of course, in the present continuous tense the "present" is a stricter idea. You cant say "we are meeting" of a meeting that finished yesterday.


Can we use "did not meet" if never meet until now

I never meet my friend until now since he left for further study. We *did not meet *for a few years. I am missing him so much.

Does"did not meet" work there?


----------



## sound shift

lingkky said:


> Can we use "did not meet" if never meet until now
> 
> I never meet my friend until now since he left for further study. We *did not meet *for a few years. I am missing him so much.
> 
> Does"did not meet" work there?


No, because the time period is _until *now*._


----------



## lingkky

Do we only  choose to use past tense "did not meet for a few years"  after we met someone recently after a few years?
It would be wrong if we already met someone recently, right?


----------



## Franco-filly

lingkky said:


> Do we only choose to use past tense "did not meet for a few years" after we met someone recently after a few years?


If you mean "when we have recently met someone again - after not seeing them for several years."  Yes, you could use "did not meet" as in my suggestion in post#4



lingkky said:


> It would be wrong if we already met someone recently, right?


I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Do you mean "Have only met someone (for the first time) recently?  If so, you could say "We did not meet until yesterday / last month"


----------



## lingkky

Franco-filly said:


> If you mean "when we have recently met someone again - after not seeing them for several years."  Yes, you could use "did not meet" as in my suggestion in post#4
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Do you mean "Have only met someone (for the first time) recently?  If so, you could say "We did not meet until yesterday / last month"



Sorry. It was my mistake. 
The question should be
Would it be wrong to say "We did not met for a few years " if I haven't met him yet? (I will meet him soon)


----------



## se16teddy

Infinitive - meet
Simple past tense - met
Past participle - met


----------



## Franco-filly

lingkky said:


> The question should be
> Would it be wrong to say "We did not me*e*t* for a few years " if I haven't met him yet? (I will meet him soon)


Do you mean that you have never met him?
If you met him in the past - several years ago - and are going to meet him soon, you should say "I haven't met him for years (but will do so tomorrow, whenever)

*did me*e*t or has/have met.


----------



## lingkky

Franco-filly said:


> Do you mean that you have never met him?
> If you met him in the past - several years ago - and are going to meet him soon, you should say "I haven't met him for years (but will do so tomorrow, whenever)
> 
> *did me*e*t or has/have met.


Yes.It is the context I want to mean. Can "haven't met" be replaced with "did not meet" in the context? Would it be wrong?


----------



## heypresto

lingkky said:


> Yes.It is the context I want to mean.


Which context? Have you met him in the past, or have you never met him?


----------



## lingkky

heypresto said:


> Which context? Have you met him in the past, or have you never met him?


Here is the context(I met him several years ago. I haven't met him yet after that.I am going to met him soon.)

I met him in the past - several years ago I *haven't* met him for years (but will do so tomorrow, whenever)

I wonder if "haven't" can be replaced with "didn't".


----------



## se16teddy

Lingkky, you must have* some *understanding of the roles of the English tenses by now. What is your analysis?


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> Lingkky, you must have* some *understanding of the roles of the English tenses by now. What is your analysis?


I think "we did not meet for years" would mean that "We met already recently after a few years of seperation".


----------



## heypresto

"We did not meet for years" = there was a time (some years in length) in the past during which we didn't meet.


----------



## heypresto

lingkky said:


> I met him in the past - several years ago I *haven't* met him for years (but will do so tomorrow, whenever)
> 
> I wonder if "haven't" can be replaced with "didn't".



No, it can't.


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> I think "we did not meet for years" would mean that "We met already recently after a few years of seperation".


Yes, I think it usually* implies* that. It *states* that there was a period of several years, probably ending in the past, during which we did* not* meet. We normally infer that there was a subsequent meeting.


----------



## lingkky

OK. Thanks for all of your help.


----------



## lingkky

Hello guys. I got another question.

I have a friend. We have never met* for some years.*

Does "some years" lead up to the present or the period  was ended in the past?
Which one the sentence is likely to mean when no further information provided? 
Why?


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> Does "some years" lead up to the present or the period  was ended in the past?


Obviously it leads up to the present because you have used the present perfect.


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> Obviously it leads up to the present because you have used the present perfect.



I think ”meet” is a stative verb.
So that, “have not met for years” could be equal to “have not been meeting for years”

Am I right？


----------



## Franco-filly

lingkky said:


> We have never met* for some years.*


If you have *ever* met the other person - even if it was fifty years ago and only for 5 minutes, you cannot use "*never* met for + any amount of time" in this context.


----------



## lingkky

We *haven't met *for *some years.*

“for some years” in the sentence could mean the period* from past to past* but the period is *likely* refer to  from *past to present* if no context is provided.
Is that right？


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> I think ”meet” is a stative verb.


No - I can't immediately think of any context in which _meet _would be stative. Saying hello to someone is an action, not a state.


----------



## heypresto

lingkky said:


> We *haven't met *for *some years.*
> 
> “for some years” in the sentence could mean the period* from past to past* but the period is *likely* refer to  from *past to present* if no context is provided.
> Is that right？



I can't think of a context in which it could mean 'from past to past'. It refers to the present, and says that it's been some years since you last met.


----------



## lingkky

heypresto said:


> I can't think of a context in which it could mean 'from past to past'. It refers to the present, and says that it's been some years since you last met.



I finally met my friend yesterday.We have not met him for a few years *before.
*
In this context“a few years ” is from past to past.I wonder whether it still works if the word “before” is removed in the sentence.

Can it still mean “from past to past” if the word “before” is removed？


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> We have not met him for a few years *before.*


This sentence is meaningless because _before_ is used wrongly.


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> This sentence is meaningless because _before_ is used wrongly.


I finally met my friend yesterday.We have not met him for a few years.

Does it work now？

1.I have never seen him *before.（*correct*）*
2.We have not met for a few years *before*.（incorrect）

May I know why？Both have “before” but only the fist one is considered correct.


----------



## heypresto

If you want to talk about a past time during which you didn't meet him, (past to past), you could say 'I *hadn't met* him for a few years'. Or 'I *didn't meet* him for a few years.'

Don't add 'before' to either of these, as it won't make sense.


----------



## se16teddy

When "before" is used in the adverbial sense of "until *now*", " before *this* moment", the range of expressions that can qualify it is limited.
_I have never/often seen him before. 
I have seen him six times before. 
I saw/have seen him six months before. _

The range of expressions that can qualify "before" in the sense of "until *then*", "before *that *moment" is wider.
_I had met him six months before. _


----------



## lingkky

se16teddy said:


> When "before" is used in the adverbial sense of "until *now*", " before *this* moment", the range of expressions that can qualify it is limited.
> _I have never/often seen him before.
> I have seen him six times before.
> I saw/have seen him six months before. _
> 
> The range of expressions that can qualify "before" in the sense of "until *then*", "before *that *moment" is wider.
> _I had met him six months before. _



I met him last week. We *haven't* met for some years.

I met him last week.We *hadn't* met for some years. 

Both of the sentences work,right?
We can choose either, right?


----------



## heypresto

I met him last week. We *haven't* met for some years.  This is a contradiction. The first sentence says you _have _met him, and the second says you _haven't_ met him.
I met him last week.We *hadn't* met for some years.


----------



## lingkky

heypresto said:


> I met him last week. We *haven't* met for some years.  This is a contradiction. The first sentence says you _have _met him, and the second says you _haven't_ met him.
> I met him last week.We *hadn't* met for some years.



I have asked the same question on post 8.But se16teddy replied me that“have not met” is correct.
Can you please see post 8?
I think there would be an argument.


----------



## lingkky

lingkky said:


> I have asked the same question on post 8.But se16teddy replied me that“have not met” is correct.
> Can you please see post 8?
> I think there would be an argument.



post 38 and post 8 are conflict.


----------



## heypresto

In post #8, the sentence being discussed was 'I met him *yesterday*. We haven't met for some years.'

In post #38, I was talking about 'I met him *last week*.'

While 'yesterday' might be perceived as the present in this context, I don't think 'last week' would be.


----------



## se16teddy

lingkky said:


> I met him last week. We *haven't* met for some years.
> I met him last week.We *hadn't* met for some years.


These both sound OK to me. But different people have different tastes about how far back the "present" can stretch for this purpose. It is a relative and subjective thing.


----------



## heypresto

I'm happy to accept that we have different tastes about how far back the present can stretch.


lingkky said:


> I think there would be an argument.


I don't.


----------



## lingkky

I met him last week.We* have/had not met f*or some years *before*.

Do both “have not met” and “had not met” work if the word “before” is added in the sentence？
Are both correct grammatically？


----------



## sound shift

"Before" makes the sentence (post 44) sound awkward. Only "had" works in that context.


----------



## lingkky

sound shift said:


> "Before" makes the sentence (post 44) sound awkward. Only "had" works in that context.


So,just delete the word “before”？


----------



## Peter_Gabriel

Franco-filly said:


> "He's my/an old friend but we *have not* met for several years" if you haven't seem him at all.
> "He's my/an old friend but we *did not* meet for several years, until I bumped into him last October" i.e. if you have met him subsequently.



Can I use Past Perfect in here?
"He's my/an old friend but we *had not met for* several years, until I bumped into him last October" "


----------



## se16teddy

Yes the past perfect is fine there, and I feel it sounds a bit more elegant than simple past.


----------

