# Parsing



## Oros

It is 5 years since I worked for your company.

Could you parse the sentence?

It = the subject

is = a verb

I am not sure. May be I is the subject here.

Help me please.


----------



## Whodunit

Oros said:
			
		

> It is 5 years since I worked for your company.
> 
> Could you parse the sentence?
> 
> It = the subject
> 
> is = a verb
> 
> I am not sure. May be I is the subject here.
> 
> Help me please.



It - subject
is - predicate
5 - number
years - object
since - adverb
I - subject
worked - predicate
for - preposition
your - possessive pronoun/object
company - object

The same in German, Oros:

Es ist (bereits) fünf Jahre her, seitdem ich für eure Firma gearbeitet habe.


----------



## Oros

Sie sind gut an Deutsch auch. 

I have a hunch the word 'since' merely joins the following two sentences.

1. It is 3 years

2. I visited Paris.

Can't it be a conjunction?


----------



## Whodunit

Oros said:
			
		

> *Du kannst auch sehr gut Deutsch*.
> 
> I have a hunch the word 'since' merely joins the following two sentences.
> 
> 1. It is 3 years
> 
> 2. I visited Paris.
> 
> Can't it be a conjunction?



Yes, because "seit" is a conjunction and "seitdem" is an adverb. Are you really a native German speaker?


----------



## elroy

Oros said:
			
		

> It is 5 years since I worked for your company.
> 
> Could you parse the sentence?
> 
> It = the subject
> 
> is = a verb
> 
> I am not sure. May be I is the subject here.
> 
> Help me please.



This sentence is grammatically incorrect in English.  It should read as follows:

*It has been five years since I have been working for your company.*

OR

*I have been working for your company for five years.*

As for the parts of the sentences, here goes:

It - pronoun, subject
has - helping verb
been - helping verb; past participle 
[has been - verb; third person singular present perfect]
five - adjective
years - predicate nominative 
since - subordinating conjunction
I - pronoun, subject
have - helping verb
been - helping verb; past participle 
working - present participle 
[has been working - verb; third person singular present perfect progressive]
for - preposition
your - possessive adjective
company - object of the preposition

I - pronoun, subject
have - helping verb
been - helping verb; past participle 
working - present participle 
[has been working - verb; third person singular present perfect progressive]
for - preposition
your - possessive adjective
company - object of the preposition
for - preposition
five - adjective
years - object of the preposition 

I hope this helps.


----------



## Oros

I trannslated the following into German:

 You are good at German too.

 So in German you wouldn't write 'Sie sind .... in this context.

 You would write 'Du kannst auch sehr gut ........ in this context.

However, it would be fine to say in English that you are good at English/German.

Regarding the question, you said the word 'since' is an adverb. 
So you have changed your position on this.

I would like to hear from you again.
*[Ich möchte von Ihnen wieder hören. ]*


----------



## Whodunit

Oros said:
			
		

> I trannslated the following into German:
> 
> You are good at German too.
> 
> So in German you wouldn't write 'Sie sind .... in this context.
> 
> You would write 'Du kannst auch sehr gut ........ in this context.
> 
> However, it would be fine to say in English that you are good at English/German.
> 
> Regarding the question, you said the word 'since' is an adverb.
> So you have changed your position on this.
> 
> I would like to hear from you again.
> *[Ich möchte von Ihnen wieder hören. ]*



No, I'll compare it with German:

"since" = "seit"
"since" = "seitdem"

Seit + Ereignis (since + event)
Seit dem Mauerfall ... (Since the fall of the Berlin Wall ...)

Seidem + Substantiv/Pronomen + Prädikat (since + noun/pronoun + predicate)
Seit ich dich kenne ... (Since I know you ...)

Please write proper German (even in an English forum), because it's my mother tongue.


----------



## Oros

Thanks Whodunit

 I would like to hear from you again.
*[Ich möchte von Ihnen wieder hören. ]* 

Please correct the above if it is wrong. 

I have a smattering of German, French and Spanish. I try to write a sentence or two from time to time and try to practice the languages whenever I meet a native German, French or Spaniard. However, there are a lot of South Americans to practice Spanish.

 Neither English nor German is my mother toungue.


----------



## Whodunit

Oros said:
			
		

> Thanks Whodunit
> 
> I would like to hear from you again.
> *[Ich möchte von Ihnen wieder hören. ]*
> 
> Please correct the above if it is wrong.
> 
> I have a smattering of German, French and Spanish. I try to write a sentence or two from time to time and try to practice the languages whenever I meet a native German, French or Spaniard. However, there are a lot of South Americans to practice Spanish.
> 
> Neither English nor German is my mother toungue.



Ich möchte wieder von Ihnen hören. (say: wieder von dir hören), because we address each other infomally!

What's your native language?


----------



## elroy

Oros said:
			
		

> Sie sind gut an Deutsch auch.
> 
> I have a hunch the word 'since' merely joins the following two sentences.
> 
> 1. It is 3 years
> 
> 2. I visited Paris.
> 
> Can't it be a conjunction?



_Since _ is a subordinating conjunction that introduces the second of the two clauses in the sentence; one clause is independent, the other is dependent.  Each has a subject and a verb (that's what defines a clause) but the independent clause can stand alone as a sentence while the dependent clause cannot.  That is, you could say "It has been three years" but you cannot say "Since I have worked for your company."  The dependent clause, as its name implies, _needs _ the independent clause in order to make sense.

I hope this is clear.


----------



## Oros

Elroy

So the following is not fine.

It is 5 years since I worked for your company.

It should be 'It has been 5 years since I worked for your company'.

I would agree with you. 

The my sentence is sound fine too. Obviously you could use the word 'ago' instead of 'since'. What do you think?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Whodunit

I am a native Korean speaker. But I lived in the USA for a few years.*


----------



## te gato

Oros said:
			
		

> Elroy
> 
> So the following is not fine.
> 
> It is 5 years since I worked for your company.
> 
> It should be 'It has been 5 years since I worked for your company'.
> 
> I would agree with you.
> 
> The my sentence is sound fine too. Obviously you could use the word 'ago' instead of 'since'. What do you think?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


If you are going to change it up and put 'ago' in for 'since'...I would say it as such...
' It was 5 years ago that I worked for your company'...

because you are speaking to someone right now..but speaking of something you had done in the past..

tg


----------



## elroy

Oros said:
			
		

> Elroy
> 
> So the following is not fine.
> 
> It is 5 years since I worked for your company.
> 
> It should be 'It has been 5 years since I *have been working * for your company'.
> 
> I would agree with you.
> 
> The my sentence is sound fine too. Obviously you could use the word 'ago' instead of 'since'. What do you think?



If you start with "It has been..." [present perfect] then you have to say "have been working" (or "have worked") [present perfect].  You cannot say "It has been 5 years since I worked."  If "it has been five years" then you are still working; saying "I worked" implies that you are not working anymore.

No, you may not simply replace "since" with "ago."  First of all, you would be eliminating the subordinating conjunction that you need to introduce your independent clause.  Secondly, you may not say "It has been five years ago..."  As Oros suggested, you can say "It was five years ago that...", but then you are referring to the moment at which you started working, and not the fact that you have been working for five years.  (Essentially, the meaning is the same, but the emphasis is different.)  That said, you would say, "It was five years ago that I started working."  Again, if you start with "it was" [past] then you have to say "I started working." [past]  If you use Oros's suggestion ("I worked") that means that you no longer work for the company.  By the way, the subordinating conjunction in this case is "that."

I hope this helps.  If you still have questions, please ask.


----------



## Kelly B

I am uncertain of the intended meaning of the sentence.

These sentences are grammatically correct:
"It has been five years since I worked for your company" means that I STOPPED working there five years ago. (whether or not the word "last" is included.)
"It has been five years since I began working for your company" means that I began then, and still work there now.
"It was five years ago that I began working..." also means that I began then and still work there now.

This is not correct:
"It has been 5 years since I have been working..."


----------



## cuchuflete

Thank you Kelly B.

Elroy stated, incorrectly, that the original sentence is incorrect.


> This sentence is grammatically incorrect in English. It should read as follows:
> *It has been five years since I have been working for your company.*
> OR
> I have been working for your company for five years.


Here is the original again:

*It is 5 years since I worked for your company.
*This means, "I ceased to work for your company five years ago."  It is perfectly correct and clear.

Elroy's first example could be taken to mean that the speaker is still employed by the company, which is contrary to the intent of the original.

The second example also contradicts the original by maintaining that the speaker is still employed by the company.

regards,
Cuchu


----------



## mjscott

Agree with Cuchuflete--two entirely different ideas.


----------



## timpeac

I agree 95% with Cuchu, the bit I dispute is that

"It has been five years since I have been working for your company"

is an English sentence at all - I can't imagine anyone saying this in any context- it doesn't make sense!! (Sorry Elroy!)

I think that you mean to say "I has been 5 years that I have been working at your company for" which, as Cuchu says, is incompatible with the original sentence.

(I should add that even that sentence is rather awkward, it would be said to stress the amount of time, so if someone said "you've been working at my company for 3 years, isn't it" you might reply with it. Otherwise you would say "I have been working at your company for 5 years").


----------



## elroy

timpeac said:
			
		

> I agree 95% with Cuchu, the bit I dispute is that
> 
> "It has been five years since I have been working for your company"
> 
> is an English sentence at all - I can't imagine anyone saying this in any context- it doesn't make sense!! (Sorry Elroy!)
> 
> I think that you mean to say "I has been 5 years that I have been working at your company for" which, as Cuchu says, is incompatible with the original sentence.
> 
> (I should add that even that sentence is rather awkward, it would be said to stress the amount of time, so if someone said "you've been working at my company for 3 years, isn't it" you might reply with it. Otherwise you would say "I have been working at your company for 5 years").



Ok, several things are going on here...

First of all, I apologize for misinterpreting the author's intention.  I thought he meant to say that the person has been working for the company for five years.  In light of that, my examples obviously do not fit.

However, I would still question the use of the present tense, as in the original example.  Does it really sound natural to say "It is 5 years since I worked..."?  Shouldn't it be "It *has been* 5 years since I worked..."?  In English, one normally uses the present perfect tense - not the present - to refer to the amount of time that has elapsed between the termination of an event and the present moment.  More examples:

It has been 4 years since I had a good ice cream cone. (Would you say "It is 4 years...???)
It has been 2 weeks since I last visited my dentist. ("It is 2 weeks.."??????)

Furthermore, the sentence that timepac suggested makes a lot less sense and sounds a lot more awkward than anything that has been suggested thus far! "It has been 5 years that I have been working at your company for."  Even if somebody were to say "You've been working for that company for 3 years, right?" I would not say "It has been 5 years that....for."  The sentence is grammatically incorrect.  The "for" is superfluous.  I would simply say, "No, I have been working there for five  years" or "It has been five years since I've been working for this company."  But that was my original suggestion.  Which brings me to my next comment...  

I don't see why this sentence "doesn't make sense."  Let's break it down grammatically.

It has been five years 
since I have been working for this company.    

The first part is the independent clause; the second part is the dependent clause.  The dependent clause is an adverb clause of time.  We could also start the sentence with it.  "Since I have been working for this company,..."
The question to ask would then be "What *has happened  * since you've been working here?"  Notice that the question is phrased with a present perfect verb.

Possible answers to the question are the following:

Since I have been working here, I have seen many interesting people.
Since I have been working here, I have never had a technical problem.

Therefore, we could just as naturally say

Since I have been working here, it has been 5 years.

The only reason this sentence may sound awkward, however, is the word order.  Switching the order of the clauses, we have my original suggestion.

It has been five years since I have been working here.

I am still at a loss at to why this is incorrect or "doesn't make sense."


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> Ok, several things are going on here...
> 
> First of all, I apologize for misinterpreting the author's intention. I thought he meant to say that the person has been working for the company for five years. In light of that, my examples obviously do not fit.
> 
> However, I would still question the use of the present tense, as in the original example. Does it really sound natural to say "It is 5 years since I worked..."? Shouldn't it be "It *has been* 5 years since I worked..."? In English, one normally uses the present perfect tense - not the present - to refer to the amount of time that has elapsed between the termination of an event and the present moment. More examples:
> 
> It has been 4 years since I had a good ice cream cone. (Would you say "It is 4 years...???)
> It has been 2 weeks since I last visited my dentist. ("It is 2 weeks.."??????)


 
"It is 5 years ..." "It has been 5 years..." both sound fine to me, and both are used. 


			
				elroy said:
			
		

> Furthermore, the sentence that timepac suggested makes a lot less sense and sounds a lot more awkward than anything that has been suggested thus far!


Elroy, I said that it was awkward, I was just trying to interpret what you might have meant. It does not sound more awkward than anything suggested so far, your sentence is the most awkward since English speakers do not express themselves in that way.


			
				elroy said:
			
		

> "It has been 5 years that I have been working at your company for." Even if somebody were to say "You've been working for that company for 3 years, right?" I would not say "It has been 5 years that....for." The sentence is grammatically incorrect. The "for" is superfluous. I would simply say, "No, I have been working there for five years" or "It has been five years since I've been working for this company." But that was my original suggestion. Which brings me to my next comment...


No, Elroy, it's not superfluous, and the sentence is not grammatically incorrect. Your examples show that you don't understand the difference between "for" and "since" in English. "It has been 5 years that I've been working at the company for." does not mean the same as "It has been five years since I've been working for this company". The first means that you have been working for them and still are and the second means that 5 years ago you stopped working for them, and would normally be expressed as "It has been five years since I've worked for this company" in any case.



			
				elroy said:
			
		

> I don't see why this sentence "doesn't make sense." Let's break it down grammatically.
> 
> It has been five years
> since I have been working for this company.
> 
> The first part is the independent clause; the second part is the dependent clause. The dependent clause is an adverb clause of time. We could also start the sentence with it. "Since I have been working for this company,..."
> The question to ask would then be "What *has happened *since you've been working here?" Notice that the question is phrased with a present perfect verb.
> 
> Possible answers to the question are the following:
> 
> Since I have been working here, I have seen many interesting people.
> Since I have been working here, I have never had a technical problem.
> 
> Therefore, we could just as naturally say
> 
> Since I have been working here, it has been 5 years.
> 
> The only reason this sentence may sound awkward, however, is the word order. Switching the order of the clauses, we have my original suggestion.
> 
> It has been five years since I have been working here.
> 
> I am still at a loss at to why this is incorrect or "doesn't make sense."


 
It doesn't make sense because "for" does not mean "since" in English. If you want it in simpler terms it does not make sense in English simply because no native speaker would say it. Your two "interesting people" and "technical problem" sentences do work the "since I have been working here sentence" doesn't. The simple reason is that we use "for" in relation to time that is continuing to the present.

Elroy, I really do not mean any offence but your profile says English is your native language. I really do not think this is the case.


----------



## Kelly B

Oh, dear. I disagree with both of you, for different parts of different sentences; I think you may be talking past each other.

As to Elroy's "It has been five years since I have been working for this company."


"Since" implies that something happened as a discrete event. So "since I have been working" is not a correct clause. "Since I began working" is ok, because beginning the job was an event; "that I have worked" is ok, because "that" is fine for the continual working.

As to Timpeac's "It is five years..." (which was not used in all examples) I agree with Elroy's objection that "It has been" is preferred.


----------



## elroy

> "It is 5 years ..." "It has been 5 years..." both sound fine to me, and both are used.



Ok, that's fine.  I just haven't really heard "it is 5 years," but I guess it can also be used. 



> Elroy, I said that it was awkward, I was just trying to interpret what you might have meant. It does not sound more awkward than anything suggested so far, your sentence is the most awkward since English speakers do not express themselves in that way.



I realize that you said it was awkward; I was agreeing with you.  I think the "for" is awkward at the end of the sentence.  Whether my sentence is the most awkward is, of course, a subjective assertion; I have yet to hear what other English speakers feel about it and how awkward it is. 



> No, Elroy, it's not superfluous, and the sentence is not grammatically incorrect. Your examples show that you don't understand the difference between "for" and "since" in English. "It has been 5 years that I've been working at the company for." does not mean the same as "It has been five years since I've been working for this company". The first means that you have been working for them and still are and the second means that 5 years ago you stopped working for them, and would normally be expressed as "It has been five years since I've worked for this company" in any case.


 
I very well understand the difference between "for" and "since," thank you.  I have no idea what led you to draw the conclusion that I don't.  I realize what you were trying to say with "it has been 5 years that I've been working at the company for" (even though we both agreed it was awkward; I would simly say, "I have been working at this company for five years"), but I don't think the second one means that you're not working there anymore.  That would be "It has been five years since I (last) worked  for this company."  Furthermore, there is not much of a difference in meaning between "have been working" and "have worked"; both mean that you are still working.  That's why the tense is called "present perfect"; it links the past with the present.  It describes an action that began in the past and either has continued into the present or has some bearing or relation on the present.  If you want to say that you no longer work for the company, you would definitely not say "have been working" or "have worked."  In any case, one is not more "normal" than the other.



> It doesn't make sense because "for" does not mean "since" in English. If you want it in simpler terms it does not make sense in English simply because no native speaker would say it. Your two "interesting people" and "technical problem" sentences do work the "since I have been working here sentence" doesn't. The simple reason is that we use "for" in relation to time that is continuing to the present.



As I said before, I completely understand the difference between "for" and "since."  Your explanation is actually incorrect.  The difference is not that "for" is used for time continuing to the present.  What about "I worked at that place for 5 years" or "I would like to vacation in Africa for a week"?  Those are past and future, respectively.  Similarly, "since" can be used in any tense.  If you would like to know, here is the real difference:

"For" is followed by an amount of time; "since" is followed by a specific time.  Compare:

I have lived here for six years. (amount of time)
I have lived here since 1996. (specific time)

That, however, is a difference between for and the preposition  since, so your comment is not applicable in the first place.  _Since _ can also be used as a subordinating conjunction, and that is the case in question.  As such, and by comparison with the preposition _since_, it is followed by a specific time.  However, because we are dealing with a subordinating conjunction here, _since _ is followed by a clause and not just a noun.  Clauses have verbs of their own; since "since" refers to actions in the past, the verb has to be either in the past tense or the present perfect tense.  When the past action has some bearing on the present, you use the present perfect tense.  That's why you can say both "Since I worked here" (past; action completed) and "Since I have been working here" (present perfect; action begun in the past and continuing into the present).     

Elroy, I really do not mean any offence but your profile says English is your native language. I really do not think this is the case.

Why does it matter what my native language is?  What does that have to do with what we're discussing?  I would appreciate your responding to my claims/comments/questions about grammar and not to my personal background.

Lastly, I would sincerely hope that we don't turn this discussion into a battle or competition; rather, let us try to show mutual respect and learn from each other.  I for my part apologize if I offended you or came on too strongly.


----------



## elroy

Kelly B said:
			
		

> Oh, dear. I disagree with both of you, for different parts of different sentences; I think you may be talking past each other.
> 
> As to Elroy's "It has been five years since I have been working for this company."
> 
> 
> "Since" implies that something happened as a discrete event. So "since I have been working" is not a correct clause. "Since I began working" is ok, because beginning the job was an event; "that I have worked" is ok, because "that" is fine for the continual working.
> 
> As to Timpeac's "It is five years..." (which was not used in all examples) I agree with Elroy's objection that "It has been" is preferred.



Are you sure you can never say "Since I have been working..."?  What about the earlier examples, like "Since I have been working here, I have met many interesting people"?  Would you consider that incorrect?


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> Are you sure you can never say "Since I have been working..."? What about the earlier examples, like "Since I have been working here, I have met many interesting people"? Would you consider that incorrect?


 
Yes, I've been pondering on this "Since I have been working here, I have met many interesting people" is fine and "I have been working here since 5 years" is not.

I think it is because "since" can be used from a certain point in time forward whereas we use "for" for a length of time. So

"I have been learning Spanish since I was 10"

and

"I have been learning Spanish for 10 years"

and if we just move those two senteces around -

"It is since I was 10 that I have been learning Spanish"

"It is 10 years that I have been learning Spanish for" or "It is for 10 years that I have been learning Spanish".

So the interesting people example means "since the date I started working here..."

I hope that helps.

By the way, I am sorry but your previous threads really do show that you do not know the difference between "for" and "since". I have no intention of turning anything into a personal battle. It is important if English really is your native tongue or not because I would then have to assume that the use of the English language in the country you come from is completely different from the usage I have seen all my life certainly in the UK and as far as I know in the rest of the English speaking world. I take it from your reply that "native" is slightly stretching the truth...


----------



## timpeac

Kelly B said:
			
		

> Oh, dear. I disagree with both of you, for different parts of different sentences; I think you may be talking past each other.


 
Kelly - out of interest which of my sentences do you disagree with?


----------



## elroy

> By the way, I am sorry but your previous threads really do show that you do not know the difference between "for" and "since". I have no intention of turning anything into a personal battle.



As I said before, I don't see how my threads led you to think that I don't know the difference.  And I hope I showed in my answer that I do.  Either way, it is not important to me whether you think I do or do not; I know that I do and I have never had a problem using either.  Furthermore, that's not even really what we're discussing.  We were discussing one particular sentence, namely "It has been five years since I have been working here" and whether it is grammatically incorrect.  You have yet to give me definitive proof - besides the claim that apparently no English speaker would ever say it - to show that it is incorrect.



> It is important if English really is your native tongue or not because I would then have to assume that the use of the English language in the country you come from is completely different from the usage I have seen all my life certainly in the UK and as far as I know in the rest of the English speaking world. I take it from your reply that "native" is slightly stretching the truth...



Once again, you drew a conclusion that I did not intend to allude to or suggest.  If you must know, this is my situation.  My mother language is technically Arabic but I went to an American school my entire life, ever since the age of five.  By American school I mean a school in which everything was taught in English, the teachers were all American, our textbooks were all from the United States, etc.  That said, I grew up with two languages; I spoke Arabic at home and only English at school.  Therefore, my English *is native.  * That is what I was referring to in my profile.  I speak it like a native, with no accent; in fact, I speak and know it far better than I know Arabic.  For all intents and purposes, and from a linguistic point of view, it can actually be considered "my native language" in that I speak it exactly like a native and it is the language I speak best; if I didn't tell you where I was from you would think I was American.  The same applies to my writing.  I think you can probably tell from the way I'm writing here that I am using correct, idiomatic English.  In short, I am bilingual - which is why I consider both Arabic and English my native languages.


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> As I said before, I don't see how my threads led you to think that I don't know the difference. And I hope I showed in my answer that I do. Either way, it is not important to me whether you think I do or do not; I know that I do and I have never had a problem using either. Furthermore, that's not even really what we're discussing. We were discussing one particular sentence, namely "It has been five years since I have been working here" and whether it is grammatically incorrect. You have yet to give me definitive proof - besides the claim that apparently no English speaker would ever say it - to show that it is incorrect.
> 
> 
> 
> Once again, you drew a conclusion that I did not inted to allude to or suggest. If you must know, this is my situation. My mother language is technically Arabic but I went to an American school my entire life, ever since the age of five. By American school I mean a school in which everything was taught in English, the teachers were all American, our textbooks were all from the United States, etc. That said, I grew up with two languages; I spoke Arabic at home and only English at school. Therefore, my English *is native. *That is what I was referring to in my profile. I speak it like a native, with no accent; in fact, I speak and know it far better than I know Arabic. For all intents and purposes, and from a linguistic point of view, it can actually be considered "my native language" in that I speak it exactly like a native and it is the language I speak best; if I didn't tell you where I was from you would think I was American. The same applies to my writing. I think you can probably tell from the way I'm writing here that I am using correct, idiomatic English. In short, I am bilingual - which is why I consider both Arabic and English my native languages.


 
Ok Ok, I don't think we are going to get much further forward here.

Basically, to me "It has been five years since I have been working for this company" with the meaning that you are still working for the company is just completely wrong. Not the sort of discussion wrong of "should I put the a comma here or not" but the sort of wrong I would expect from a foreign student of English. I would just guess that they meant "it has been five years since I started working for this company" or something like that.

That is why I was enquiring into your background because these forums constantly show that a certain way of expression you think might be normal in say the UK is completely different in the US. However, no one else has said that your phrase is right either, including at least two US speakers, which is what gave me to believe that English wasn't your mother tongue. It really does sound instinctively that wrong to me. How can I give proof that it is wrong? If I say "John likes apples" and tell you that this means that he doesn't like oranges either, how could you give me proof that I was wrong either?

I suppose that is why I view it as slightly pointless to get into a discussion as to whether it _should_ be allowed or not, since as far as I know no native says it. I am not sure why you think that isn't good enough reason for it to be wrong? I've tried to think for pure grammatical rules as to why this might be the case, but you have been able to pick holes in them. Fair enough, I'm not a grammar teacher. I can tell you though to my ears it sounds like a mistake, and apparently to others too.

Maybe it was a local variant grammar in the place you went to school in the US.

I have obviously touched a nerve - which I really didn't mean to do. I only thought I was correcting an error. OK, all I can say is that I have never seen this grammatical usage with this meaning before. I look forward to talking with you in threads in the future.


----------



## elroy

> Ok Ok, I don't think we are going to get much further forward here.
> 
> Basically, to me "It has been five years since I have been working for this company" with the meaning that you are still working for the company is just completely wrong. Not the sort of discussion wrong of "should I put the a comma here or not" but the sort of wrong I would expect from a foreign student of English. I would just guess that they meant "it has been five years since I started working for this company" or something like that.
> 
> That is why I was enquiring into your background because these forums constantly show that a certain way of expression you think might be normal in say the UK is completely different in the US. However, no one else has said that your phrase is right either, including at least two US speakers, which is what gave me to believe that English wasn't your mother tongue. It really does sound instinctively that wrong to me. How can I give proof that it is wrong? If I say "John likes apples" and tell you that this means that he doesn't like oranges either, how could you give me proof that I was wrong either?



I realize it apparently sounds that wrong to you.  And to tell you the truth, after people starting discussing it, I said it to myself a few times and couldn't decide whether it was right or wrong.  However, it didn't sound as preposterously wrong as it apparently did to you, which is why I kept asking for grammatical explanations.  When I analyzed it grammatically myself, it seemed to be ok to me.  I'm sure there's some grammatical explanation (if it indeed is completely wrong in all cases) that perhaps someone else can provide. 



> I suppose that is why I view it as slightly pointless to get into a discussion as to whether it _should_ be allowed or not, since as far as I know no native says it. I am not sure why you think that isn't good enough reason for it to be wrong? I've tried to think for pure grammatical rules as to why this might be the case, but you have been able to pick holes in them. Fair enough, I'm not a grammar teacher. I can tell you though to my ears it sounds like a mistake, and apparently to others too.
> 
> Maybe it was a local variant grammar in the place you went to school in the US.



Well, I do think that's a good enough reason.  I myself have said so many times when foreign learners of English ask me why something is wrong; I just say "It doesn't really sound right."  I just wasn't sure EVERYBODY agreed on this point.  I'm going to ask other native speakers I know, and I'm hoping more people share their opinions here, so that we can get to the bottom of it!



> I have obviously touched a nerve - which I really didn't mean to do. I only thought I was correcting an error. OK, all I can say is that I have never seen this grammatical usage with this meaning before. I look forward to talking with you in threads in the future.



Likewise.  I am sorry if it got slightly out of hand.  I'm just passionate about language as I'm sure you are!


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> I realize it apparently sounds that wrong to you. And to tell you the truth, after people starting discussing it, I said it to myself a few times and couldn't decide whether it was right or wrong. However, it didn't sound as preposterously wrong as it apparently did to you, which is why I kept asking for grammatical explanations. When I analyzed it grammatically myself, it seemed to be ok to me. I'm sure there's some grammatical explanation (if it indeed is completely wrong in all cases) that perhaps someone else can provide.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I do think that's a good enough reason. I myself have said so many times when foreign learners of English ask me why something is wrong; I just say "It doesn't really sound right." I just wasn't sure EVERYBODY agreed on this point. I'm going to ask other native speakers I know, and I'm hoping more people share their opinions here, so that we can get to the bottom of it!
> 
> 
> 
> Likewise. I am sorry if it got slightly out of hand. I'm just passionate about language as I'm sure you are!


 
Yes, me too - sorry I can get quite passionate about language too. It's the reason we are all here after all!!

What do you think about the explanation that it is "since" a point of time but "for" a period of time? eg

I have waited since 5 o'clock, but

I have been waiting for 3 hours?

That would work, wouldn't it? You wouldn't say "I have been waiting since 3 hours", or would you?


----------



## elroy

timpeac said:
			
		

> Yes, me too - sorry I can get quite passionate about language too. It's the reason we are all here after all!!
> 
> What do you think about the explanation that it is "since" a point of time but "for" a period of time? eg
> 
> I have waited since 5 o'clock, but
> 
> I have been waiting for 3 hours?
> 
> That would work, wouldn't it? You wouldn't say "I have been waiting since 3 hours", or would you?



Of course not.  It is clear that "since" is used with a specific point in time while "for" is used for an amount/period of time.

However, as I said earlier, that difference is between "for" and the preposition "since."  In the sentence we have "since" is being used as a conjunction, and for that reason cannot be replaced by "for" anyway.  That is, you cannot say "For I have been working here" - not even theoretically - so it is a completely different discussion altogether.

Basically, I guess the fundamental question is this: can "since" (even as a conjunction) be used ONLY with specific points in time?  If that is the case, then you would have to say "since I began working here" or something similar.  But that would also mean sentences such as "since I have been working here I have met many people" would also be wrong.  A rule is a rule.

However, I find that hard to accept since I've always heard expressions like "since I've been working here," "since I've been living here," etc.  Furthermore, how else would you express that idea?  "Since the moment that I moved here and until the present moment"??????

I will try to do some research on this and post any findings that come up...


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> However, I find that hard to accept since I've always heard expressions like "since I've been working here," "since I've been living here," etc. Furthermore, how else would you express that idea? "Since the moment that I moved here and until the present moment"??????


 
I think that you're right in that we need to interpret "since I have been working here" as "since I started working here" etc, then the "rule" that since is only used with specific points of time is not broken.


----------



## elroy

Please go to this.  Not to toot my own horn or anything, but it confirms everything I said earlier about the usage of "since" as a conjunction.  In fact, the second sentence in the third sample sentence pair under " 'since' as conjunction " quite exactly corresponds to the sentence we are dealing with:

*It’s  * *only a week*  *since  * *we’ve known *  each other, but we’re very much in love.

*It's  * (been) *five years *  *since  * *I've been working*  here.

Notice how the similarly colored sentence parts quite faithfully correspond to each other.  The tenses are all the same, and it is obvious in the sample sentence that the two people still know each other.

So what do you say?  Could it be that it just sounded strange to you, but not that it's completely incorrect?  After all, the source _is _ British!


----------



## elroy

Sidenote:

"It's" (it is) does not _exactly _ correspond to "it's been" (it has been) but we already agreed both forms were acceptable and meant the same thing.


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> Please go to this. Not to toot my own horn or anything, but it confirms everything I said earlier about the usage of "since" as a conjunction. In fact, the second sentence in the third sample sentence pair under " 'since' as conjunction " quite exactly corresponds to the sentence we are dealing with:
> 
> *It’s **only a week* *since **we’ve known *each other, but we’re very much in love.
> 
> *It's *(been) *five years **since **I've been working* here.
> 
> Notice how the similarly colored sentence parts quite faithfully correspond to each other. The tenses are all the same, and it is obvious in the sample sentence that the two people still know each other.
> 
> So what do you say? Could it be that it just sounded strange to you, but not that it's completely incorrect? After all, the source _is _British!


 
Yes, they are very similar - but I think the first one really means "since we met". It just seems to me that "since" must have some point in time reference, be it explicit or implicit. Where it is implicit, as in both the examples above, if it is possible to assume that it means "since the last time I xxx" we assume that. And so number two would mean you don't work there any more, and the last time you did was 5 years ago. The first sentence does sound fine to me, but the second - with the "and still am working here" meaning - just wrong.

Maybe it would help to keep the structure but change the words, to get a new perspective. If someone said "It's been 5 years since I've been living in France" would you think they meant they still live there and first went there 5 years ago, or that they used to live in France and left 5 years ago? For me it is unequivocably the second.


----------



## elroy

timpeac said:
			
		

> Yes, they are very similar - but I think the first one really means "since we met". It just seems to me that "since" must have some point in time reference, be it explicit or implicit. Where it is implicit, as in both the examples above, if it is possible to assume that it means "since the last time I xxx" we assume that. And so number two would mean you don't work there any more, and the last time you did was 5 years ago. The first sentence does sound fine to me, but the second - with the "and still am working here" meaning - just wrong.
> 
> Maybe it would help to keep the structure but change the words, to get a new perspective. If someone said "It's been 5 years since I've been living in France" would you think they meant they still live there and first went there 5 years ago, or that they used to live in France and left 5 years ago? For me it is unequivocably the second.



Yes, the specific point in time reference is implicit, but I don't see why that should deny the fact that the action/event is still continuing into the present.  Did you read the explanation from the link?



> The tense in the since-clause can be past or perfect, depending on *whether it refers to a point in the past  or to a period of time leading up to the present.*



I totally agree.  If I wanted to say that I wasn't working there anymore and that the last time I did was five years ago, I would say "It has been five years since I *worked * here."   The same goes for your France example.  If I weren't living there anymore, I would say "It has been five years since I *lived * in France."   So, in answer to your question, if someone said "It has been five years since I have been living in France," I would in fact think that the person still lived there.  Why else would you say "have been living"?  

When does "I have been doing something" ever mean that I don't do it anymore?


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> Yes, the specific point in time reference is implicit, but I don't see why that should deny the fact that the action/event is still continuing into the present. Did you read the explanation from the link?
> 
> 
> 
> I totally agree. If I wanted to say that I wasn't working there anymore and that the last time I did was five years ago, I would say "It has been five years since I *worked *here." The same goes for your France example. If I weren't living there anymore, I would say "It has been five years since I *lived *in France." So, in answer to your question, if someone said "It has been five years since I have been living in France," I would in fact think that the person still lived there. Why else would you say "have been living"?
> 
> When does "I have been doing something" ever mean that I don't do it anymore?


 
Yes, I read the link!!

"I have been doing something" can mean "and don't any more" after "since". "It's been 3 years since I've been living in France" to me could only mean that you used to live there. I agree it's sounds inelegant, and "It's been 3 years since I lived in France" would be more common, but inelegant or not it would seem to me to be the only conclusion from the sentence (as opposed to assuming they still lived there).

I think that we'd better agree to disagree, since these last two posts show that we interpret the sentence differently, and that's not something either of us can convince the other on since it is gut feeling. For you the only interpretation is that they are still there, for me the only interpretation is that they don't!! Oh well, language isn't an exact science.


----------



## elroy

timpeac said:
			
		

> Yes, I read the link!!
> 
> "I have been doing something" can mean "and don't any more" after "since". "It's been 3 years since I've been living in France" to me could only mean that you used to live there. I agree it's sounds inelegant, and "It's been 3 years since I lived in France" would be more common, but inelegant or not it would seem to me to be the only conclusion from the sentence (as opposed to assuming they still lived there).
> 
> I think that we'd better agree to disagree, since these last two posts show that we interpret the sentence differently, and that's not something either of us can convince the other on since it is gut feeling. For you the only interpretation is that they are still there, for me the only interpretation is that they don't!! Oh well, language isn't an exact science.



I am going to make one final plug, and if I still fail to convince you, I will rest my case.

Consider some of the other examples that the link gives:

*They’re a lot happier since they’ve been living apart.*

Does this mean that they are still living apart or that they are not living apart anymore?  

*You’re looking much better since you’ve been out of hospital.*

Are you still out of the hospital or are you back there now?

I think perhaps what may have led you to feel that the actions/events have stopped is the governing clauses that we used throughout our examples, namely, clauses of time (It has been five years/three years, etc.)  For it seems indubitable when the clause changes that the action/event described in the "since"-clause is still continuing into the present.  Logically, though, it shouldn't make a difference what the governing clause is.

Suffice it to say that the present perfect tense is used for actions begun in the past that have some effect on the present.  If the action were complete, there would be no reason to use the present perfect.  

Does that convince you?  Probably not, since as you said it's just a feeling.  But as I said, if all these examples and explanations, as well as a British source, can't convince you, there's not much more I can do!


----------



## Kelly B

The bit I objected to from Timpeac was the "It is 5 years since/that", preferring 
"it has been 5 years". Looking back now, I don't think that usage originated with you, you only supported it as a possibility, but it was what Elroy originally objected to, lo these many posts ago.
...now trying to gracefully withdraw...


----------



## elroy

Kelly B said:
			
		

> The bit I objected to from Timpeac was the "It is 5 years since/that", preferring
> "it has been 5 years". Looking back now, I don't think that usage originated with you, you only supported it as a possibility, but it was what Elroy originally objected to, lo these many posts ago.
> ...now trying to gracefully withdraw...



Haha, you needn't worry about making a graceful withdrawal!    We've come a long way since your original comment!


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> I am going to make one final plug, and if I still fail to convince you, I will rest my case.
> 
> Consider some of the other examples that the link gives:
> 
> *They’re a lot happier since they’ve been living apart.*
> 
> Does this mean that they are still living apart or that they are not living apart anymore?
> 
> *You’re looking much better since you’ve been out of hospital.*
> 
> Are you still out of the hospital or are you back there now?
> 
> I think perhaps what may have led you to feel that the actions/events have stopped is the governing clauses that we used throughout our examples, namely, clauses of time (It has been five years/three years, etc.) For it seems indubitable when the clause changes that the action/event described in the "since"-clause is still continuing into the present. Logically, though, it shouldn't make a difference what the governing clause is.
> 
> Suffice it to say that the present perfect tense is used for actions begun in the past that have some effect on the present. If the action were complete, there would be no reason to use the present perfect.
> 
> Does that convince you? Probably not, since as you said it's just a feeling. But as I said, if all these examples and explanations, as well as a British source, can't convince you, there's not much more I can do!


 
Thanks Elroy - I know you're doing your best to convince me, but I don't know if you will succeed, because I am not sure what you are trying to convince me of -

I agree that the examples in your link are fine, and that examples you give in bold above are fine. I have no problem with them.

However the "living in France" example and the "working here" examples, no they do not work for me. There must be something intrinsically different to them, compared to the sentences that I consider to work. I think the difference is that in all the ones that "work" for me you can put in the phrase "started to" to the second part of the phrase (not necessarily to make an elegant phrase, but it is still possible).

They've been much happier since the started living apart.
You've been looking much better since you started being out of hospital.
It's only been a week since we started knowing each other but we're very much in love.

Now, you cannot do that with the sentences I do not think work -

It's been 5 years since I started working for your company - No, this isn't what you want to say.

It's been 3 years since I started living in France - again, no this is not what you mean.

So it seems to me that these sort of sentences are different in type to the ones that allow the "since". They easily allow a one occasion linked interpretation to the second part of the sentence.

Obviously, I haven't been analysing all this in my head from the start, the "living" and "working" examples sound immediately wrong to me, but it seems to be a good test as to whether the sentence works or not.


----------



## elroy

> Thanks Elroy - I know you're doing your best to convince me, but I don't know if you will succeed, because I am not sure what you are trying to convince me of -



I'm trying to convince you that "It's been 5 years since I've been working here" can mean that I'm still working there!   



> It's been 5 years since I started working for your company - No, this isn't what you want to say.
> 
> It's been 3 years since I started living in France - again, no this is not what you mean.



I don't see why not.  I started working 5 years ago, and I'm still working there.  I started living in France (I moved there) 3 years ago, and I'm still living there.  

After all, in the other sentences, for example "They've been much happier since they started living apart," it doesn't necessarily mean (phrased with the "start," that is) that they are still living apart.  

I guess I just don't see the difference.


----------



## timpeac

elroy said:
			
		

> I'm trying to convince you that "It's been 5 years since I've been working here" can mean that I'm still working there!
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see why not. I started working 5 years ago, and I'm still working there. I started living in France (I moved there) 3 years ago, and I'm still living there.
> 
> After all, in the other sentences, for example "They've been much happier since they started living apart," it doesn't necessarily mean (phrased with the "start," that is) that they are still living apart.
> 
> I guess I just don't see the difference.


 
Yes, I see your point. I think that the single "point in time" is much more clearly referred to in the phrases I think work, but it is a bit subjective.

Elroy, my head hurts!! I've got to go to bed (It's gone 2am here!).

Explaining or justifying grammar rules was never my favourite exercise. I just commented on a usage I thought was patently wrong. Ok, maybe it's not patently wrong (I just don't remember hearing it!!). Whether or not it should theoretically be allowed seems a bit pointless to me, as I do stand by my initial reaction. We've probably scared off other people from commenting now, but it would be good to hear what other people think. At the end of the day, even if you convinced me that there was no reason per se that it shouldn't mean that, I couldn't stop myself having that reaction on hearing it...

Maybe we should start a new thread as a pole a) this means you have been for x years and you still are or b) this means you're not and haven't been for x years. I'm too tired to do so though!!

Good night!<<tired smiley>>


----------



## elroy

timpeac said:
			
		

> Yes, I see your point. I think that the single "point in time" is much more clearly referred to in the phrases I think work, but it is a bit subjective.
> 
> Elroy, my head hurts!! I've got to go to bed (It's gone 2am here!).
> 
> Explaining or justifying grammar rules was never my favourite exercise. I just commented on a usage I thought was patently wrong. Ok, maybe it's not patently wrong (I just don't remember hearing it!!). Whether or not it should theoretically be allowed seems a bit pointless to me, as I do stand by my initial reaction. We've probably scared off other people from commenting now, but it would be good to hear what other people think. At the end of the day, even if you convinced me that there was no reason per se that it shouldn't mean that, I couldn't stop myself having that reaction on hearing it...
> 
> Maybe we should start a new thread as a pole a) this means you have been for x years and you still are or b) this means you're not and haven't been for x years. I'm too tired to do so though!!
> 
> Good night!<<tired smiley>>



All I can say is "Fair enough."   

Do you want to start a poll?  Let's wait until tomorrow and see if anyone braves this thread and submits a comment; if not that many people do, we can start a poll.   

Good night to you too! (It's way past 2 a.m. here!   )


----------



## te gato

I would say...

'It has been five years since I worked for your company'..
'It was five years ago that I worked for your company'...
'I have not worked for your company in five years'...

because the pay sucked, I only got one 15 min. coffee break, forget even thinking about a holliday, yadda,yadda...

very simple and to the point...and easly understood..

tg


----------



## elroy

te gato said:
			
		

> I would say...
> 
> 'It has been five years since I worked for your company'..
> 'It was five years ago that I worked for your company'...
> 'I have not worked for your company in five years'...
> 
> because the pay sucked, I only got one 15 min. coffee break, forget even thinking about a holliday, yadda,yadda...
> 
> very simple and to the point...and easly understood..
> 
> tg



Yes, of course; those are all clear and unambiguous.  The question is whether the other sentence is correct, and if so, what it means.  Feel free to vote in the poll if you'd like.  Boy, this really has turned into something big!


----------

