# How long do you know?



## rociofg

Hola,
en un ejercicio había una frase para completar y no se como se completa:

_Julia is your best friend,isn't she? How long ____ (know) her_?

Mi profesor dice que se tiene que poner _have you known,_ pero a mi me encaja más _do you know_

Que pensais vosotros?

Gracias!


----------



## adrs

Tu profesor tiene razón.
Debería ser: How long *have you known* her? ¿Cuánto tiempo hace que la conoces?


----------



## CARORAGI

Hola, coincido con tu profesor. Debes utilizar el Presente Perfecto en este ejemplo, para expresar que la acción/actividad comenzó en el pasado y continúa en el presente, en este caso el hecho de haber conocido a tu amiga en el pasado y seguir con esa amistad en el presente.
Saludos.


----------



## slazenger14

Coincido con ustedes. 

Julia is your best friend, isn't she? How long __*have_you_known* her?


----------



## for learning

CARORAGI said:


> Hola, coincido con tu profesor. Debes utilizar el Presente Perfecto en este ejemplo, para expresar que la acción/actividad comenzó en el pasado y continúa en el presente, en este caso el hecho de haber conocido a tu amiga en el pasado y seguir con esa amistad en el presente.
> Saludos.


 
Hello!. Pero en la siguiente frase:
"I've been on holidays", significa  que ya has vuelto de vacaciones, ¿no?. Es Present Perfect, pero la acción ya ha terminado...

SAludos!


----------



## slazenger14

He estado de vacaciones en México pero ya estoy de vuelta en EEUU. 

Para mí (por lo menos en inglés) puede significar que tus vacaciones ya se acabaron.


----------



## CARORAGI

Hola for learning, tal vez olvidé decir que la función que yo describí del Presente Perfecto es una entre otras. El ejemplo que tu usas es correcto pero expresa otro de los usos del tiempo verbal en cuestión.

Saludos.


----------



## for learning

Gracias!. Es que todavía estoy tratando de entender la lógica de las frases con "have been", me parecen un poco raras todavía.
Ademas si dices: "How long have you been on holidays?", aqui si implica que sigues todavia de vacaciones, no?. ¿No puede ser que sea el "how long" lo que determine que la accion se mantiene todavia?.
Un saludo.
p.d.En el foro Solo ingles me acaba de decir un nativo que "How long have you been in London" implica que todavia estas en Londres.
p.d.Perdon por las tildes, se me acaba de fastidiar el teclado.


----------



## CARORAGI

Un placer contactarme contigo for learning. Es verdad, Present Perfect y sus construcciones "_have been" son_ un poquitín complicados para nosotros.

Saludos desde Argentina


----------



## rociofg

Muchas gracias a todos!! A mi tambien me resulta un poco complicado el _Have been_. Suponia que mi profesor tenía razon, pero no lo llegaba a enteder, ahora me ha quedado claro!

Saludos


----------



## slazenger14

Lo veo así:
-Hace dos días que vivo acá = I have lived here for two years. 
He vivido en la misma ciudad donde nací. = I have lived in the same city where I was born. 

Cuando se usa el modo del presente después de la estructura "hace .. que", que (en inglés) se traduce "have". En este ejemplo me hace pensar que aún estás haciendo algo. 
Sin embargo si se dice "I have been on vacation...but I am back" es evidente que se acabaron tus vacaciones porque se pone la énfasis en que "I am back". Por lo tanto, sin decir "I am back", se puede pensar que aún estás de vacaciones.


----------



## Agró

slazenger14 said:


> He vivido en la misma ciudad donde nací. = I have lived in the same city where I was born.



This means, in Spanish, you no longer live in that city. In this case we would say:
Vivo en la misma ciudad donde nací.


----------



## XiaoRoel

> This means, in Spanish, you no longer live in that city. In this case we would say:
> Vivo en la misma ciudad donde nací.


Exacto. Pero también puedes añadir un adverbio o un CC de tiempo o modo y conservar el tiempo de pasado:_ siempre/toda la vida he vivido en la misma ciudad donde nací._


----------



## Agró

XiaoRoel said:


> Exacto. Pero también puedes añadir un adverbio o un CC de tiempo o modo y conservar el tiempo de pasado:_ siempre/toda la vida he vivido en la misma ciudad donde nací._



O _"siempre/toda la vida *viví* en la misma ciudad donde nací"_, si eres hispanohablante noroccidental, como XiaoRoel.


----------



## slazenger14

Agró said:


> This means, in Spanish, you no longer live in that city. In this case we would say:
> Vivo en la misma ciudad donde nací.



Bueno, no es así en inglés. Puede significar que aún se está viviendo en la misma ciudad. Gracias por aclararme ese detalle Agró.


----------



## BLT

Agró said:


> This means, in Spanish, you no longer live in that city. In this case we would say:
> Vivo en la misma ciudad donde nací.



Yes, I think it means that in English, as well. "I have lived in the city where I was born" sounds like an odd sentence. On the other hand, "I have lived all my life in the city where I was born" is fine.

And with the business of saying "I have been on vacation..." I think that the implied sense is, "I have been on vacation up until now." It's something that began in the past and is ending right now. Obviously, you don't mean that you're returning this second, but still, psychologically, you're at the point of returning. (Or, of course, that you're still on vacation - that's another possibility.)

"I've been on vacation and haven't had a chance to call you." 
"I've been on vacation and that's why I have a tan." 
"I've been on vacation and that's why I haven't cut my grass." 
"I've been on vacation and I'm looking forward to telling you all about it."
"I've been on vacation and that's why I don't know what's going on."

It seems to me that when you say "I've been on vacation" rather than "I went on vacation," it's because there's something in the present, brought about by the vacation, that you're referring to next. But once you have really gotten home - your bags are unpacked, you've gotten your mail, you have answered your phone messages, you've gone back to work - you're likely to use only the past tense about your vacation.

"How long have you been in London?" does imply that you're still in London. Normally, once you return to Dallas, the question would be, "How long were you in London?" However, I can easily see telling someone, once I got home, "Sorry if I'm sounding British right now - I've been in London for a while." I think the likely question would then be, "How long were you there?" not "How long have you been there?"

As a university student studying Spanish years ago, I became curious about the use of the present perfect in English and in Spanish. When I did a research paper about that, I was surprised to find how small the differences were. I remember reading that in some Spanish-speaking places, you always use the present perfect when you're referring to the current time period. "Hoy he ido al mercado" instead of "Hoy fui al mercado." That seemed odd to me, but honestly I haven't seen that used very much. Mostly the uses are parallel enough not to cause much trouble.


----------



## slazenger14

No necesariamente_. _No decimos "I live here for 5 years" ni "I lived here for 5 years (if you are still living there). 
_I have lived here for 5 years now. _<--La acción de vivir acá sigue.


----------



## BLT

Oh - except, of course, for the hace...que construction (Hace 5 años que vivo aquí) - I forgot about that difference. Is that what you meant, slazenger?


----------



## slazenger14

Precisamente


----------



## Forero

"I have lived here for five years" is about my having lived here for five years, a period of time that began at least five years ago, i.e. five years entirely in the past.

In contrast, "I live here for five years" is about my living here now, for five years in the present:

_I live here for five years and then I return to Mexico._

"(For) how long have you known her?" is asking about a period of time  before the present but relates that time, already passed, to the present time implied by "Julia is your best friend, isn't she?".

"(For) how long do you know her?" would be an unusual thing to ask, referring to a length of time in the present:

_How long do you know her before you return to Mexico?
__How long do you know her most nights?

_This assuredly does not fit the context given.

Que sea de ayuda.


----------



## Masuas

Estimado _*rociofg, tu maestro tiene la razón aunque a tí te parezca de otra manera. Es fácil. Tienes que aprender a conjugar  el verbo ''to have y combinarlo con el participio pasado de los verbos, : have known, *he conocido,*have been, he *estado, have* smiled, he sonreido, have eaten, he comido, have learned, he aprendido. *_
*Aprende  el pasado y participio pasado de todos los verbos que puedas y te aseguro que saldrás triunfante.*


----------



## for learning

slazenger14 said:


> No necesariamente_. _No decimos "I live here for 5 years" ni "I lived here for 5 years (if you are still living there).
> _I have lived here for 5 years now. _<--La acción de vivir acá sigue.


Hello again! Thank you very much for your explanations. I don´t understand the subject well enough yet. Here is my doubt:

I have been in London: it  means you have just come from London or you are still in London.(according to BBT).
I have been in London for three years: it means you are still in London.( according to you).Why not the possibility of having just come from London as in the first sentence?.
Then how would you say that you have just come from London and you "have spent" three years there?.I have _just_ been in london for three years?.
Is it the use of "for" or "how long"(in questions)what makes the meaning to change into something like: "hace... que" as you suggested, implying that the action is still in the present?

My regards!


----------



## Agró

for learning said:


> Hello again! Thank you very much for your explanations. I don´t understand the subject well enough yet. Here is my doubt:
> 
> I have been in London: it  means you have just come from London or you are still in London.(according to BBT).
> I have been in London for three years: it means you are still in London.( according to you).Why not the possibility of having just come from London as in the first sentence?.
> Then how would you say that you have just come from London and you "have spent" three years there?.I have _just_ been in london for three years?.
> Is it the use of "for" or "how long"(in questions)what makes the meaning to change into something like: "hace... que" as you suggested, implying that the action is still in the present?
> 
> My regards!



Si llevas en Londres tres años (y, por tanto, todavía estás en Londres):

I've been in London for three years.

Si acabas de volver de Londres, donde has estado durante tres años (acción acabada):

I was in London for tree years.


----------



## BLT

Agró said:


> Si llevas en Londres tres años (y, por tanto, todavía estás en Londres):
> 
> I've been in London for three years.
> 
> Si acabas de volver de Londres, donde has estado durante tres años (acción acabada):
> 
> I was in London for tree years.



Well, I still maintain that for the first little while of being at home, you can still say "I've been in London for three years" (and that's why, now, X is true). But that only can last as long as, psychologically, you've just arrived home.

As a statement, by itself, Agró is correct. With more context, though, the situation gets more complicated.

Here are some more examples that strike me; in all these cases you've already returned from London:
I was in London for three years, and while I was there, I learned X (...lived at X, ate lots of X).
I've been in London for three years, and (have recently returned and that's why I have the authority to tell you that) in London this is how they do things.
I've been in London for three years, and that's why I don't know who's governor here.


----------



## for learning

Agró said:


> Si llevas en Londres tres años (y, por tanto, todavía estás en Londres):
> 
> I've been in London for three years.
> 
> Si acabas de volver de Londres, donde has estado durante tres años (acción acabada):
> 
> I was in London for tree years.


Perdón por mi insistencia, pero trato de encontrarle una lógica y no se la veo.
¿Por qué si dices " I have been in London" puede querer decir que acabas de venir, y sin embargo con "I have been in London for three months" no?

Gracias de nuevo!
I have just seen your last post BLT. According to your explanations the subject makes more sense to me.


----------



## Forero

To me "I have been in London for three years" by itself does not say whether I am in London now, nor does it say whether my latest stay in London is recent. It only says that for three years (in the past, near or remote) I have been in London. Perhaps I have been in London for 3 years, in Spain for 2 years, and in America for 20 years. The order does not matter. Once I have been in London, "I have been in London" will always be a true statement.

We can say:

_I have been in London for the past three years._
_I have been in London for three years, but that was twenty years ago._

The "I have been in London" part means the same in both of these sentences, that my having been in London is a present fact. In both sentences, I may or may not be in London now.

The difference between Spanish and English, besides the difference between _hace_ and _for_, is that Spanish present tense stands for present simple and present perfect a la vez.

_Hace tres años que estoy en Londres._ = I am in London and have been for three years. = I came to London three years ago and am still there.

English present simple does not refer to a span of time in the past.


----------



## BLT

Oh, my, Forero is right - but it's another sense again. In this case, "I have been in London" (but it was twenty years ago) still has reference to the present - something like "Of all the places I've been (up to now), London is one of them."

On the other hand, I have a feeling that most of these uses are paralleled in Spanish. ¿Jamás has visitado Londrés? Sí, lo he visitado dos veces, y pienso viajar allí el año que viene también. Doesn't that work? If so, then we're not really talking about special uses of the present perfect in English, but just listing the ways that present perfect can be used in both languages, which may not be necessary. It was the similarity between the uses in the two languages which struck me when I studied this twenty-five years ago.


----------



## for learning

Hello again!
It is  nice to find out that the use of Present Perfect is or could be the same in SApanish and in English. But it seems to me that that is the theory; the practice could be somewhat different. 
I think so as I have seen that many native english speakers and not only natives  translate:
" I have been in London for three years"  as :" Llevo tres años en Londres.
And with other examples , in some courses of english gramma, I have seen as a example and without context:
" I have worked in the shop for four years": " Llevo cuatro años trabajando en la tienda.
Best regards!


----------



## BLT

Yes, you're right. As Forero said, English never (as far as I know) uses the present tense to talk about the past. This is the main difference between the use of the present perfect in English and Spanish.

Where Spanish says, "Llevo tres años en Londres," or "Llevo cuatro años trabajando en la tienda," or "Hace cuantro años que trabajo en la tienda," English can't use the present tense in these cases, because we consider it to be referring to what has happened in the past. Because we see these sentences as being about what has happened in the past (though continuing into the present), we must use the present perfect, as in your examples.

If we want to use the present tense for some reason, but also want to talk about how long it's been going on, we have to explicitly change tenses:
"I work in that shop, and I have (worked there) for three years."
"I'm in London right now, and I have been for three years."

"I work in the shop for three years." In this case, it's theoretically possible to say this, but it would imply this instead: Every time I start to work in that shop, I work there for three years, then I go on to something else.

Interesting, because this contradicts, a bit, to what I said about how English never uses the present tense to talk about the past. What I'm describing here - "Every time I do this" - does in fact describe something that's happened in the past (and that, I assume, will continue into the future), doesn't it? What is the difference between "I work in the shop" (implies past, present, and future) and "I work in the shop for three years"? I guess that the difference is this: When you put a time frame on it ("for three years") we consider it to be specifically referring to the part of the action that has already passed. In that case, we can't use present tense. When we say, "I have worked in the shop for three years," we're talking about what has happened up to now without making any reference at all to the present (perhaps we've just been fired!) or to the future. If we want to reference those times (present or future), we have to do it separately, I think.

Other than that major exception, the use of the present perfect in Spanish and English is not that different. There are differences, but I am more struck by the similarities than by the differences.

Does that help?


----------



## for learning

Hello again!.
I think I am very very close to understand it. I will read the thread again.
I didn´t come up with  the fact that in Spanish we use the present tense("Llevo diez años en Londres") and English doesn`t have such structure.
And as in English you can say: " I was in London for three years" and you don`t use  the present tense, then the only way to say "Llevo diez años en Londres" is " I have been in London for three years".
I mean , if you would mean that you are not in London now, you would use: " I was in London for three years". So if you say" I have been in London for three years", though it can suggests that you are in other city now, normaly suggests that you are still there.

In short: A-I was in..: suggests you are not there now.
             B-I have been in..: suggests you "were", but maybe also you still  are there.
             C-So if you say B normaly you mean that you are still there, as there is no other way to say that. Because if you want to say ;"Llevo tres años en Londres", you can`t say that by other kind of sentende. Can you?

Many many thanks once more!


----------



## BLT

You're right. "Llevo tres años en Londres" is "I've been in London for three years," and there aren't any other ways of saying that (that I can think of), assuming you're still there.


----------



## for learning

Hello again!
Thank you very much to all of you for your explanations, especially to you BLT for your clear reasonings. I hope I could help you a little with your Spanish(if you need it) in some occasion.
Rocío, espero que todo esto te haya aportado algo también en tu duda original.
Best regards!


----------

