# Perfect Continuous(PC) in Spanish



## noncasper

Hello to all,I have been confusing with this in spanish,have any struture in spanish to express these PC tenses?
For Examples:
I have been doing this exercise for 20 minutes.
Vengo haciendo este ejercicio por 20 minutos.
Me he sido haciendo este ejercicio por 20 minutos.
(which is right?)

It has been raining all morning.
Viene lloviendo todas mañanas.
Ha sido lloviendo toda mañanas.

I know the present PC when translate to spanish is able to use the "venir/llevar + gerund" but how the struture "he/ha/has...+ ado/ido +gerund"is this acceptable too?If it have discriminations,could explain and tell me please?

About Past PC,or future PC,they don't have any other strutures(same as "venir + gerund" for present PC) to express without "haber(Imperfecto/Futuro) + Past Participle + gerund"?


----------



## aceituna

Se utiliza el participio del verbo estar:
he/has/ha... + ESTADO + gerundio.

He estado haciendo este ejercicio 20 minutos.
Ha estado lloviendo toda la mañana.


----------



## e.ma

Llevo 20 minutos haciendo este ejercicio (it means you're still doing it)
Ha estado lloviendo toda *la* mañana (¿o Últimamente llueve todas las mañanas?; it's not the same)


----------



## Ana_Fi

'Haber estado' y 'llevar' son las más comunes.
'Viene' se usa bastante menos.


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

Nunca se dice el verbo 'ser' con cualquier forma del progresivo. Siempre será usado con 'estar'.


----------



## NewdestinyX

noncasper said:


> Hello to all,I have been confusing with this in spanish,have any struture in spanish to express these PC tenses?
> 
> *[Blue = sounds better; Red = incorrect and change to this]
> *
> For Examples:
> I have been doing this exercise for 20 minutes.
> Vengo Llevo 20 minutos haciendo este ejercicio por 20 minutos.
> Me He sido estado haciendo este ejercicio por 20 minutos.
> (which is right?)
> Hace 20 minutos que hago este ejercicio.
> Hago este ejercicio desde hace 20 minutos.
> 
> It has been raining all morning.
> Viene Lleva toda la mañana lloviendo todas mañanas.
> Ha sido estado lloviendo todas mañanas toda la mañana.
> Hace toda la mañana que llueve.
> Llueve desde hace toda la mañana.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> About Past PC,or future PC,they don't have any other strutures(same as "venir + gerund" for present PC) to express without "haber(Imperfecto/Futuro) + Past Participle + gerund"?



I have made some corrections for you above. Time expressions for things starting in the past and continuing into the present --  are most common in Spanish in one of 3 ways (for affirmative statements).

1-Hace + time expression + que + present verb.
2-Present verb + desde hace + time expression.
3-Llevar/Tener conjugated + time expression + verb in gerund.

Oddly enough, though the "he estado + -ando/-iendo" version is not incorrect -- they are very much less used -- and is a little bit of a direct translation from English. And I'd never heard of the VENIR + gerund versions until you wrote them. I would have thought them incorrect until a native spoke up and said they were rare -- but not wrong.


----------



## María Madrid

I suggest you stick to llevar, venir may not be understood in all Spanish speaking countries. At least not in Spain.

I also suggest never to make a direct translation (I have been + ing he estado + ger) as the meaning may be different, even if both sentences sound perfectly right in both languages when translated word for word. 

I have been working (or I have worked) here for 3 years is not the same as He estado trabajando aquí 3 años (or he trabajado aquí tres años). In English it means you still work there, in Spanish it means you don't anymore, so you should use "llevo trabajando" in both cases

With negatives you normally can translate more literally. I haven't seen him for 3 years. No le he visto desde hace tres años. Saludos,


----------



## NewdestinyX

María Madrid said:


> I have been working (or I have worked) here for 3 years is not the same as He estado trabajando aquí 3 años (or he trabajado aquí tres años). In English it means you still work there, in Spanish it means you don't anymore, so you should use "llevo trabajando" in both cases



Really???!?!  Are you really saying that "he estado trabajando aquí 3 años" implies the work has STOPPED? Why? I've never heard this.


----------



## María Madrid

It does in Spain. In northern Spain they'd normally go for trabajé aquí... but in central Spain we tend to use present perfect even when we should use past simple. 

We have been married for 3 years is certainly not the same as Hemos estado casados 3 años. In Spanish this means you've just divorced... 

Why you never heard of this? Good question, it so important to know the difference because it sounds just fine in both languages if you translate word for word and the meaning is so different. Even many advanced students don't know this (I mean Spanish students learning English)... Saludos,


----------



## kios_01

María Madrid said:


> I also suggest never to make a direct translation (I have been + ing he estado + ger) as the meaning may be different, even if both sentences sound perfectly right in both languages when translated word for word.
> 
> I have been working (or I have worked) here for 3 years is not the same as He estado trabajando aquí 3 años (or he trabajado aquí tres años). In English it means you still work there, in Spanish it means you don't anymore, so you should use "llevo trabajando" in both cases


 
Wow. Eso no lo sabía. Lo que me han enseñado es que el pretérito perfecto tiene efecto hasta el presente. Así que a mí me significan lo mismo las dos frases, la inglesa y la española.


----------



## María Madrid

kios_01 said:


> Wow. Eso no lo sabía. Lo que me han enseñado es que el pretérito perfecto tiene efecto hasta el presente. Así que a mí me significan lo mismo las dos frases, la inglesa y la española.


En las negativas sí puede coincidir así como en las frases con siempre y nunca, pero es un tiempo que puede dar lugar a confusiones. 

En todo caso estoy hablando de have + ed// been+ing con for/since, no present perfect sin más. Elvis has left the building se diría en español con el mismo tiempo verbal. Saludos,


----------



## NewdestinyX

María Madrid said:


> It does in Spain. In northern Spain they'd normally go for trabajé aquí... but in central Spain we tend to use present perfect even when we should use past simple.
> 
> We have been married for 3 years is certainly not the same as Hemos estado casados 3 años. In Spanish this means you've just divorced...
> 
> Why you never heard of this? Good question, it so important to know the difference because it sounds just fine in both languages if you translate word for word and the meaning is so different. Even many advanced students don't know this (I mean Spanish students learning English)... Saludos,



Maria we can't mix up these syntaxes. I asked you about HE ESTADO + -ando/-iendo. I did not ask about HE ESTADO + ADJECTIVE (casados). That is a completely different syntax. Can you clarify what you mean please. In the sentence "He estado trabajANDO 3 años" -- has the work stopped in the present???? That's what you said originally..

Thanks,
Grant


----------



## noncasper

> Nunca se dice el verbo 'ser' con cualquier forma del progresivo. Siempre será usado con 'estar'.


Yes,thank you,i got it!



NewdestinyX said:


> I have made some corrections for you above. Time expressions for things starting in the past and continuing into the present --  are most common in Spanish in one of 3 ways (for affirmative statements).
> 
> 1-Hace + time expression + que + present verb.
> 2-Present verb + desde hace + time expression.
> 3-Llevar/Tener conjugated + time expression + verb in gerund.
> 
> Oddly enough, though the "he estado + -ando/-iendo" version is not incorrect -- they are very much less used -- and is a little bit of a direct translation from English. And I'd never heard of the VENIR + gerund versions until you wrote them. I would have thought them incorrect until a native spoke up and said they were rare -- but not wrong.



Yes i thank your helps,but all i have studied is not by myself,i've been learning by many sources,and i can show u that where i got it.
http://www.elearnspanishlanguage.com/grammar/verbs/presentprogressive.html



> Originally Posted by* Maria Madrid*
> I suggest you stick to llevar, venir may not be understood in all Spanish speaking countries. At least not in Spain.
> 
> I also suggest never to make a direct translation (I have been + ing he estado + ger) as the meaning may be different, even if both sentences sound perfectly right in both languages when translated word for word.
> 
> I have been working (or I have worked) here for 3 years is not the same as He estado trabajando aquí 3 años (or he trabajado aquí tres años). In English it means you still work there, in Spanish it means you don't anymore, so you should use "llevo trabajando" in both cases
> 
> With negatives you normally can translate more literally. I haven't seen him for 3 years. No le he visto desde hace tres años. Saludos,


Ok,i will follow your way,llevar + gerund is most simple and easy to understand than "....word to work from english...but not same meanings..."


----------



## noncasper

Ah,I have one more question,You have showed me that i had better use "llevar + gerund" for PC,then...I want to know which tense for me to conjugate the "llevar" verb in 4 PC tenses(or it's only apply for the Present PC?)
Present Perfect Progressive
llevo,lleva,llevas...
Past Perfect Progressive
llevaba,llevaba,llevabas...
Future Perfect Progressive
llevaré,llevará,llevarás...
Condition Perfect Progressive
llevaría,llevaría,llevarías...


----------



## NewdestinyX

noncasper said:


> Ah,I have one more question,You have showed me that i had better use "llevar + gerund" for PC,then...I want to know which tense for me to conjugate the "llevar" verb in 4 PC tenses(or it's only apply for the Present PC?)
> Present Perfect Progressive
> llevo,lleva,llevas...
> Past Perfect Progressive
> llevaba,llevaba,llevabas...
> Future Perfect Progressive
> llevaré,llevará,llevarás...
> Condition Perfect Progressive
> llevaría,llevaría,llevarías...



In this structure -- only present tense and imperfect past would be used for LLEVAR.

Llevo tres días trabajando. = I HAVE been working for 3 days.
Llevaba tres días trabajando. - I HAD been working for 3 days.

Those are the only 2 tenses these structures use.


----------



## e.ma

It's a bit more baroque, but it exists:

Llevo 3 años trabajando aquí, y el año que viene *llevaré* 4. (it's been 3 years THAT I'VE BEEN working here, and next year it'll be 4 years)
Para cuando llegues *llevaré* dos horas cocinando. (by the time you'll arrive I'll have been cooking for two hours)

*Llevaría* más tiempo haciéndolo si hubiera podido empezar antes. (I would have been doing it for a longer time if I had been able to start earlier)
Como no sabíamos si *llevaría* mucho tiempo haciéndolo, le dijimos que descansara. (as we didn't know whether he had been doing it for long, we told him to make a break)
Pensando que *llevaría* mucho tiempo sin comer, le invité a casa.(thinking he might have not eaten in a long time, I invited him home)

(Sorry about those examples' translation: sounds so horrible, but I hope it helps)


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> Really???!?!  Are you really saying that "he estado trabajando aquí 3 años" implies the work has STOPPED? Why? I've never heard this.



Well, at least it doesn't imply that you are still working there as I've been told it means in English. So, perhaps it's not a good translation in general terms.

Anyway, I think it's not impossible to think on a context where  that structure makes sense while you are still working. After all, it is a past tense, we are not refering directly to the present in any way, it depends on the context.


----------



## María Madrid

NewdestinyX said:


> Maria we can't mix up these syntaxes. I asked you about HE ESTADO + -ando/-iendo. I did not ask about HE ESTADO + ADJECTIVE (casados). That is a completely different syntax. Can you clarify what you mean please. In the sentence "He estado trabajANDO 3 años" -- has the work stopped in the present???? That's what you said originally..
> 
> Thanks,
> Grant


Again YES. 

I have worked //have been working here for 3 years= Llevo 3 años trabajando aquí
He trabajado aquí tres años//He estado trabajando aquí tres años = I worked here for 3 years. Not anymore.
I have worked for 3 years does NOT translate into He trabajado aquí tres años. 

And I'm not mixing up anything, just giving you some examples on how present perfect or pres perf cont *+* for/since in English imply an action that still continues (I have been married for...) but in Spanish it means it's finished. 

Another example: She's been in London for three days (and she's still there)
Ha estado en Londres tres días (word for word tranlation) and a Spanish speaker will clearly understand she's now no longer in London, therefore it should be translated as Lleva tres días en Londres. 

But if you say I've been here before, OF COURSE you can use the same tense in Spanish with the same meaning. The only case when Spanish pretérito pefecto is used with a similar meaning as English present perfect, meaning a continued action is when you use it with siempre/nunca.

Siempre/Nunca me ha gustado la música barroca (and I still do/don't) 

Saludos,


----------



## mhp

Just in passing I want to note that “haber + participio” in Spanish is *past* perfect (_pretérito perfecto_), but “have + participle” in English is *present* perfect. There is a good reason for these names. This structure (in progressive and non-progressive forms) is essentially a past tense in Spanish and a present tense in English.


----------



## Niko1

Does anyone know about a good grammer website (or book) in reference to the tenses?


----------



## María Madrid

For English, English Grammar in Use, Cambridge University Press. Saludos,


----------



## NewdestinyX

e.ma said:


> It's a bit more baroque, but it exists:
> 
> Llevo 3 años trabajando aquí, y el año que viene *llevaré* 4. (it's been 3 years since I'm working here, and next year it'll be 4 years)
> <snip>
> 
> (Sorry about those examples' translation: sounds so horrible, but I hope it helps)



Hey thanks for that info. I guess I can see how they could be used in the other tenses. And your English translations were VERY good -- only the one above is not quite right. English only uses 'since' in the negative inflections (something has NOT been happening) of these sentences -- not the affirmative ones.
 
So:
It's been 3 years THAT I've been working here. (or even more natural) I have been working here for 3 years.
But:
It's been 3 years SINCE I'VE workED here = Llevo tres años SIN trabajar aquí. -or- Hace 3 años que NO trabajo aquí.


----------



## María Madrid

NewdestinyX said:


> ENglish only uses 'since' in the negative versions of these sentences -- not the positive.


 
 There's nothing wrong with "I've been working here *since* 2002". And it's certainly not negative. Saludos,


----------



## NewdestinyX

María Madrid said:


> There's nothing wrong with "I've been working here *since* 2002". And it's certainly not negative. Saludos,


That's a completely different syntax, Maria. But you're right;"since" can work in the affirmative. The one with 'since' that doesn't work in English is:

It's been 4 years since I've been working here. Incorrect English. (this is what the forero posted)
It's been 4 years THAT I've been working here. Correct


----------



## María Madrid

NewdestinyX said:


> That's a completely different syntax, Maria. But you're right;"since" can work in the affirmative. The one with 'since' that doesn't work in English is:
> 
> It's been 4 years since I've been working here. Incorrect English. (this is what the forero posted)
> It's been 4 years THAT I've been working here. Correct


Ok, I see your point, now, thanks for explaining. 

In any case it's perfectly correct to say:

It's two years since we last met. 
It's ages since we went there. 

Saludos,


----------



## María Madrid

mhp said:


> Just in passing I want to note that “haber + participio” in Spanish is *past* perfect (_pretérito perfecto_), but “have + participle” in English is *present* perfect. There is a good reason for these names. This structure (in progressive and non-progressive forms) is essentially a past tense in Spanish and a present tense in English.


Excellent explanation Mhp. Thanks for posting it! Saludos,


----------



## Outsider

mhp said:


> Just in passing I want to note that “haber + participio” in Spanish is *past* perfect (_pretérito perfecto_), but “have + participle” in English is *present* perfect. There is a good reason for these names. This structure (in progressive and non-progressive forms) is essentially a past tense in Spanish and a present tense in English.


I disagree. That's just a matter of naming. Both tenses have the same structure, and very similar meaning.


----------



## mhp

Outsider said:


> I disagree. That's just a matter of naming. Both tenses have the same structure, and very similar meaning.



 Of course! 

  Nonetheless, pretérito perfecto is considered one of the five types of past tenses in Spanish grammar. It does share some common characteristic with the English present perfect. For example

  ¿Has visto a Juan?

  But it is also used as a past tense in ways that present perfect cannot be used in English. For example,

  Hace un momento que he llegado (un pasado inmediato)
  (I arrived a moment ago)

  Esta mañana ha llovido. (un pasado en el que se encuentra el hablante)
  (It rained this morning -AmE)

  Mi abuela ha muerto hace ocho años. (un pasado emocional)
  My grand mother died eight years ago.


----------



## NewdestinyX

María Madrid said:


> Ok, I see your point, now, thanks for explaining.
> 
> In any case it's perfectly correct to say:
> 
> It's two years since we last met.
> It's ages since we went there.
> 
> Saludos,



Well, correct, --maybe-- but not natural. In both those sentences both British and American speakers would uniformly prefer It's BEEN + time expression. The syntax has to stay past 'progressive' to make sense. A very fast speaker could ellipse the 'been' -- but rarely. Sounds very strange to me. "It's two years (since)" sounds more like a direct translation from Spanish of "Hace dos años que...(no)".

And let's not forget that both of those sentences are 'negative inflections' (something has NOT been happening) --which is the more common use of 'since' in time expressions in English -- and would go over into Spanish as:
_ Hace 2 años que NO...._
_ Llevamos 2 años SIN_..., etc.

The only formation with time expressions in English where 'since' is in an "affirmative" inflection is this:
[Subject + has/have been + -ing + SINCE + a specific point in time..]
And how DOES that go over into Spanish???? Having a mental lapse.. ;-)

So for all practical purposes 'since' is used in 'negative' inflections of the past progressive.


----------



## NewdestinyX

mhp said:


> Hace un momento que he llegado (un pasado inmediato)
> (I arrived a moment ago)


Isn't this more common as: Llegué hace un momento. ??



> Esta mañana ha llovido. (un pasado en el que se encuentra el hablante)
> (It rained this morning -AmE)


This sounds like central SPain's preference for present perfect over preterite. ¿no?



> Mi abuela ha muerto hace ocho años. (un pasado emocional)
> My grand mother died eight years ago.


Still sounds like a Spain-ism.


----------



## lazarus1907

NewdestinyX said:


> This sounds like central SPain's preference for present perfect over preterite. ¿no?


No es una cuestión de preferencia por parte de los españoles por un tiempo en particular, sino de otros países por el pretérito indefinido frente al perfecto. En España no cada tiempo expresa una cosa y no siempre pueden intercambiarse, y usamos el que consideramos apropiado, aunque prefiramos el otro.


----------



## NewdestinyX

lazarus1907 said:


> No es una cuestión de preferencia por parte de los españoles por un tiempo en particular, sino de otros países por el pretérito indefinido frente al perfecto. En España no cada tiempo expresa una cosa y no siempre pueden intercambiarse, y usamos el que consideramos apropiado, aunque prefiramos el otro.



I don't agree. I know discussing regionalisms can be an incendiary issue -- and I don't wish it to be. But a 'perfect' tense does not pinpoint a specific time, grammatically speaking. It is incorrect in Spanish and English to utter: 
Yesterday I have gone there.
Ayer he ido allí.

What's the difference then between: "He llegado ayer" and "Mi abuela ha muerto hace 2 años." ?? They both attempt to use a perfect tense for a specific moment in time.


----------



## Outsider

What is, exactly, a perfect (or perfective!) verb is far from clearcut. In any event, the semantic value of perfects and perfectives varies from language to language, and in the case of Spanish even from dialect to dialect.


----------



## mhp

NewdestinyX said:


> Isn't this more common as: Llegué hace un momento. ??


As far as I know, the way I wrote it is more common. 



> This sounds like central SPain's preference for present perfect over preterite. ¿no?


As far as I know, it is not limited to any particular part of Spain, it is used this way in the entire peninsula. (radio, TV, newspapers, etc)



> Still sounds like a Spain-ism.


I don't understand. I have no idea in how many other countries, besides Spain, it is commonly used this way. But would the fact that it is used in Spain somehow dismiss the usage as irrelevant?

By the way, I learned Spanish in Spain so of course I'm more familiar with how it is used there than, say, Argentina.


----------



## lazarus1907

NewdestinyX said:


> Ayer he ido allí.


No voy a discutir regionalismos, pero esa frase, además de sonar fatal, según las gramáticas normativas no es la manera correcta de usar el pretérito perfecto.


----------



## NewdestinyX

mhp said:


> But would the fact that it is used in Spain somehow dismiss the usage as irrelevant?



Oh no. Not irrelevant. But some regionalisms aren't grammatically correct for the whole of the Spanish language. That's what we try to explore on these forums. Most of us are students. So to learn regionalisms is an important part of learning but only if you are going to spend the majority of your time in a region. I don't think most American students of Spanish need to learn the vosotros or vos forms of the verbs unless they are planning to spend a lot of time in Spain or Argentina. The majority of the Spanish speaking world doesn't use these. And yet all verb tenses are grammatical. 

Now in some regions they use ANDÉ for ANDUVE. But it is not correct. It is 'relevant' (for that region) but not correct for the Spanish language that a foreigner learns - or for that matter -- that the RAE and its bureaus in LatAm would prescribe. The same is true for the tendency in Spain to use present perfect for preterite. It is only in that region of the world that it is done and therefore has to be learned as a regionalism. Let's check what the RAE and other sources say about its 'correctness'. Lazaraus? Do you have a source or two?


----------



## NewdestinyX

lazarus1907 said:


> No voy a discutir regionalismos, pero esa frase, además de sonar fatal, según las gramáticas normativas no es la manera correcta de usar el pretérito perfecto.



The issue is that grammatically it may be incorrect. So that means 'any' use of present perfect for perterite would equally be 'unprescribed' grammatically. Do you have a source you could cite that tells us of the proper use of pretérito perfecto?


----------



## lazarus1907

NewdestinyX said:


> The issue is that grammatically it is incorrect. So that means 'any' use of present perfect for perterite would equally be 'unprescribed'.


No, sometimes you can exchange them if you want, although they are used with different nuances.


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> I don't agree. I know discussing regionalisms can be an incendiary issue -- and I don't wish it to be. But a 'perfect' tense does not pinpoint a specific time, grammatically speaking. It is incorrect in Spanish and English to utter:
> Yesterday I have gone there.
> Ayer he ido allí.



Cierto, pero es justo al contrario. No es que usemos el perfecto donde cabría esperar el indefinido. Salvo algunos hablantes de la zona de Madrid creo que todo el mundo por aquí diría _ayer fui_. Se trata de que ellos en general usan el indefinido en situaciones en las que, al menos para nosotros, iría mejor el pretérito perfecto, frases como _ya he terminado de comer_, o _hoy no ha llovido_.

Luego hay otra situación mucho más resbaladiza, que es cuando no se especifica el marco temporal, frases como _¿Cómo has pasado/pasaste las vacaciones?_ En España sí es una cuestión de preferencia, que no de capricho. El hablante elige una u otra opción según como percibe el hecho, o cómo quiere que se perciba en términos de cercanía/lejanía temporal. En muchas zonas de América sólo se usa el indefinido. En España, si estamos hablando de las últimas vacaciones, las dos formas son posibles.

No se trata por cierto de la España central sólamente sino en realidad todo el país excepto zonas de Galicia, Asturias y Canarias.



> What's the difference then between: "He llegado ayer" and "Mi abuela ha muerto hace 2 años." ?? They both attempt to use a perfect tense for a specific moment in time.


Cierto, eso es abuso del pretérito perfecto, no es muy común, pero también se puede oír en un momento dado.


----------



## NewdestinyX

mhp said:


> <<Hace un momento que he llegado (un pasado inmediato)>>
> -----As far as I know, the way I wrote it is more common.



Common more in Spain. If you look at the country of many of the articles in the first search.

But the HACE ____ QUE structures are different syntactically than a simple 'subject + verb' sentence. And that may be confusing the issue.

In Google:
Web Results *1* - *10* of about *1,770* *Spanish* pages for * "hace un rato que he llegado"*.
Web Results *1* - *10* of about *565* *Spanish* pages for * "llegué hace un rato"*


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> Cierto, pero es justo al contrario. No es que usemos el perfecto donde cabría esperar el indefinido. Salvo algunos hablantes de la zona de Madrid creo que todo el mundo por aquí diría _ayer fui_. Se trata de que ellos en general usan el indefinido en situaciones en las que, al menos para nosotros, iría mejor el pretérito perfecto, frases como _ya he terminado de comer_, o _hoy no ha llovido_.
> 
> Luego hay otra situación mucho más resbaladiza, que es cuando no se especifica el marco temporal, frases como _¿Cómo has pasado/pasaste las vacaciones?_ En España sí es una cuestión de preferencia, que no de capricho. El hablante elige una u otra opción según como percibe el hecho, o cómo quiere que se perciba en términos de cercanía/lejanía temporal. En muchas zonas de América sólo se usa el indefinido. En España, si estamos hablando de las últimas vacaciones, las dos formas son posibles.



Thanks for that clarification. I'm pretty sure the grammars don't like this interchanging of the two. And I agree, as I travel and work in Spain alot that it is used. But it should not be imitated by foreigners learning Spanish unless they wish to spend a lot of time in Spain.



> No se trata por cierto de la España central sólamente sino en realidad todo el país excepto zonas de Galicia, Asturias y Canarias.


An important clarification. Thank you. In Britain there is also more use of the Present Perfect for Preterit than in America.



> *Newdestiny:*
> What's the difference then between: "He llegado ayer" and "Mi abuela ha muerto hace 2 años." ?? They both attempt to use a perfect tense for a specific moment in time.





> Cierto, eso es abuso del pretérito perfecto, no es muy común, pero también se puede oír en un momento dado.


Thanks for acknowledging that. Certain non-prescribed usages happen in all of the Spanish Speaking World. And it's difficult to admit that though common it's not 'technically' correct.


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> Thanks for that clarification. I'm pretty sure the grammars don't like this interchanging of the two. And I agree, as I travel and work in Spain alot that it is used. But it should not be imitated by foreigners learning Spanish unless they wish to spend a lot of time in Spain.



Si te refieres al sobreuso del pretérito perfecto, que es algo relativamente minoritario en España, me parece algo razobable. Si es la distinción general indefinido/perfecto, no tanto. Ten en cuenta que en algunos puntos de América esta distinción llega prácticamente a desaparecer. Y en cualquier caso, después de leer muchos hilos sobre el tema en este sitio, todavía estoy muy lejos de conocer cual es el sistema indefinido/perfecto en Hispanoamérica, suponiendo que exista. Lo digo por ponerme en la piel de un estudiante extranjero.

Para entendernos, _llegué hace un rato_ suena perfecto para mí, lo cual no quiere decir que no tenga el oído acostumbrado a la otra versión, _he llegado hace un rato_. La gente a menudo pone el sentido por encima de la sintaxis, y el instante que ocurrió hace un rato, desde cualquier perspectiva que lo mires, pertenece al mismo intervalo temporal que el ahora, el intervalo en curso. Pero si alguien dice _hoy no llovió_, definitivamente es una persona que habla con acento (con un acento distinto del mío, claro )


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> Thanks for that clarification. I'm pretty sure the grammars don't like this interchanging of the two.



So, if you come back to the office after your summer holiday and I ask you: _¿Qué tal lo has pasado? _What reason have grammars to consider this usage no proper?

And if I forget asking you for a few weeks, and then I say: _Oye, que no te he preguntado, ¿qué tal lo pasaste en tus vacaciones? _It's now a proper use?


----------



## María Madrid

NewdestinyX said:


> Still sounds like a Spain-ism.


There's no such thing as Spain-ism. There's Spanish. Saludos,


----------



## María Madrid

mhp said:


> Mi abuela ha muerto hace ocho años. (un pasado emocional)
> My grand mother died eight years ago.


It's true you can hear that in some areas, but it's not the right use of pretérito perfecto. Pretérito perfecto doesn't go that long into the past, it's kind of recent. The right way to say it would be "murió hace ocho años". My Peruvian cleaning lady tends to use this structure all the time, which I find chocking, as you can't really say "me he hecho xxx... hace cinco años". 

In Spain you can hear similar wrong use, but not referring to something that happened such a long time ago. 


NewdestinyX said:


> a 'perfect' tense does not pinpoint a specific time, grammatically speaking. It is incorrect in Spanish and English to utter:
> Yesterday I have gone there.
> Ayer he ido allí.
> 
> What's the difference then between: "He llegado ayer" and "Mi abuela ha muerto hace 2 años." ?? They both attempt to use a perfect tense for a specific moment in time.


 
Pretérito perfecto is used to refer to a recent past. 2 years ago is certainly past. 

Just FYI, in northern Spain they tend to use pretérito indefinido where in other areas of Spain we'd use pret. perf.: No la vi en la entrada (said by someone who has just arrived and was at the entrance a moment ago). Most people in Spain would say: no la he visto en la entrada (because that happened 2 minutes ago). 


NewdestinyX said:


> Most of us are students.


Native Spanish speakers are certainly not students. Maybe not everyone is an expert but be certain that a huge number of us are professional teachers, have a university degree in Spanish, etc. Excuse me if this sounds too harsh, no offence intended, but my perception is that you regularly question statements from native speakers the moment they don't agree with you, not so much that you ask for a clarification or further explanation, but rather dismiss some of the opinions you get, which I find kind of odd. Saludos,


----------



## e.ma

NewdestinyX said:


> Hey thanks for that info. I guess I can see how they could be used in the other tenses. And your English translations were VERY good -- only the one above is not quite right. English only uses 'since' in the negative inflections (something has NOT been happening) of these sentences -- not the affirmative ones.
> 
> So:
> It's been 3 years THAT I've been working here. (or even more natural) I have been working here for 3 years.
> But:
> It's been 3 years SINCE I'VE workED here = Llevo tres años SIN trabajar aquí. -or- Hace 3 años que NO trabajo aquí.



Thank you, NewdestinyX


----------



## mhp

María Madrid said:


> It's true you can hear that in some areas, but it's not the right use of pretérito perfecto. Pretérito perfecto doesn't go that long into the past, it's kind of recent.



 The explanation that I’ve seen for this (for example, by Gili Gaya) goes something like:
  Mi padre ha muerto hace tres años (relación afectiva)
Mi padre murió hace tres años (noticia desprovista de emotividad)

  Of course, this is not something that I’ve heard very often, but it does come out in my favorite grammar book. I had no idea that it sounds bad. Doing a quick search in databases of the RAE, I was able to find some examples of this. For example, from Galdós,



> Maxi no comprendía, y Ballester, decidido a darle la noticia sin rodeos ni atenuaciones, concluyó así:
> - Sí, su mujer de usted ya no existe. La pobrecita se nos ha muerto hace hoy ocho días.
> Y al decirlo, se conmovió extraordinariamente, velándosele la voz. Maxi prorrumpió en una risa desentonada.


 which seems to be consistent with Gaya’s explanation.


----------



## NewdestinyX

María Madrid said:


> Native Spanish speakers are certainly not students. Maybe not everyone is an expert but be certain that a huge number of us are professional teachers, have a university degree in Spanish, etc. Excuse me if this sounds too harsh, no offence intended, but my perception is that you regularly question statements from native speakers the moment they don't agree with you, not so much that you ask for a clarification or further explanation, but rather dismiss some of the opinions you get, which I find kind of odd. Saludos,



Please forgive me, María. I can see how you'd feel that way. The truth is that I very much appreciate your input and the other natives and I learn very much. I too am a professional in the Spanish language and I think if you go back over my posts you'll note that at first I ask a 'question' of clarification of someone giving input. And only if their input goes contrary to something that my authoritative written sources say -- it's then where you'll find me challenging strongly. My only intent for challenging is to help students who watch here understand the differences between the Spanish a native can speak and the Spanish a student should learn all the way until they are fluent. And to to emphasize the kind of Spanish they could use on a job interview or in professional settings. And to also account for the differences regionally which are many in the beautiful language of Cervantes. Interestingly enough there are only a few topics I would take on with a Spaniard -- and this was one of them. I have worked in Spain for many year. I'm there for 2-3 weeks at a time 3-4 times a year and have been all over Spain with my work. Love it. But I will try and police my passion for prescriptive correctness a little more as I am still new here. Thanks for pointing out the annoyance I have caused.

Warm regards,
Grant

P.S. I also jump in when I see a different syntax than the one being discussed offered as a proof for the existence of something. Our interchange about 'since' got confusing. And I was trying to show how 'since' is mostly a 'negative inflection' with time periods.


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> So, if you come back to the office after your summer holiday and I ask you: _¿Qué tal lo has pasado? _What reason have grammars to consider this usage no proper?
> 
> And if I forget asking you for a few weeks, and then I say: _Oye, que no te he preguntado, ¿qué tal lo pasaste en tus vacaciones? _It's now a proper use?



No each of those sentence is a proper use of each. In the first you are asking how a 'period of time' in the past "has been".  As a period. You are not marking a time frame. As María has said this is for more recent past happenings that not marked in the sentence by a moment like 'ayer' or 'anoche' or 'hace un momento'. In that case 'present perfect' is the proper usage.

When you get further from the event itself it becomes encapsulated in time and becomes a preterite event. Often these events are marked by a time marker. With verbs of happening or being you have greater latitude. PASAR, ESTAR, etc. 

What happens with the regionalism in Spain in that they use present perfect for encapsulated events in time where the preterite is supposed to be.

¿Te ha gustado la película (anoche)? for ¿Te gustó la película (anoche)? is a regionalism. 'Liking' is a finite encapsulated action when it refers to something liked recently. The preterite is germane.


----------



## e.ma

I find very interesting this Spanish-learning slang of yours... never heard of time encapsulating before.

I should say this indefinido/perfecto question lays mostly on the psichological take on things; as it is about time, which depends on perception


----------



## mhp

Are you trying to say that it's all relative? 

Bad joke


----------



## e.ma

mhp said:


> Are you trying to say that it's all relative?
> 
> Bad joke



good one, mhp!


(it IS relative, in fact -_eppure si muove!*_)

*Non-Einstein quote


----------



## NewdestinyX

e.ma said:


> good one, mhp!
> 
> 
> (it IS relative, in fact -_eppure si muove!*_)
> 
> *Non-Einstein quote



lol!! I love the levity here. You guys are a great bunch here. I am learning so much and feel I can offer something. Time will tell.

This thread really isn't about present perfect versus preterite. So we should probably get back to the topic.


----------



## San

NewdestinyX said:


> No each of those sentence is a proper use of each. In the first you are asking how a 'period of time' in the past "has been".  As a period. You are not marking a time frame. As María has said this is for more recent past happenings that not marked in the sentence by a moment like 'ayer' or 'anoche' or 'hace un momento'. In that case 'present perfect' is the proper usage.



Yes, and this "proper" use, like in _ya he terminado de comer_, or _esa peli ya la he visto, is a Spain-ism _



> When you get further from the event itself it becomes encapsulated in time and becomes a preterite event. Often these events are marked by a time marker. With verbs of happening or being you have greater latitude. PASAR, ESTAR, etc.
> 
> What happens with the regionalism in Spain in that they use present perfect for encapsulated events in time where the preterite is supposed to be.


It seems to happen that with hace + short period of time. But I think no much farther.



> ¿Te ha gustado la película (anoche)? for ¿Te gustó la película (anoche)? is a regionalism. 'Liking' is a finite encapsulated action when it refers to something liked recently. The preterite is germane.


This is not Spanish from Spain. Other foreros have said that before. I've read in this site that some people in Madrid speaks in that way, but I've never noticed that really.


----------



## e.ma

San said:


> This is not Spanish from Spain. Other foreros have said that before. I've read in this site that some people in Madrid speaks in that way, but I've never noticed that really.



Everybody in Spain would ask "¿Te *gustó* la película?" when speaking about anoche's.

(Sorry about my total ignorance on time encapsulation)

But where are you from, San? Which Spanish do you speak?


----------



## NewdestinyX

San said:


> Yes, and this "proper" use, like in _ya he terminado de comer_, or _esa peli ya la he visto, is a Spain-ism _






> That It seems to happen that with hace + short periods of time. But I think not much farther/further.


 Okay -- but I hear it in other places as well.



> This is not Spanish from Spain. Other foreros have said that before. I've read in this site that some people in Madrid speaks in that way, but I've never noticed that really.


 It seems to me more Madrid, yes, but also in Catalán influenced areas like Barcelona and Mallorca - from what i've heard.


----------



## e.ma

San said:


> This is not Spanish from Spain. Other foreros have said that before. I've read in this site that some people in Madrid speaks in that way, but I've never noticed that really.


 
Excuse me, San, but I'm not understanding which of those sentences would be the correct one in Spain's Spanish: ¿Te gustó la peli anoche? o ¿Te ha gustado la peli anoche?

(To me, if I heard the second one, I wouldn't think it comes from a different Spanish-speaking region, but from another-language speaking person)



San said:


> Salvo algunos hablantes de la zona de Madrid creo que todo el mundo por aquí diría _ayer fui_. Se trata de que ellos en general usan el indefinido en situaciones en las que, al menos para nosotros, iría mejor el pretérito perfecto, frases como _ya he terminado de comer_, o _hoy no ha llovido_.


 
Por favor, si alguien ha oído alguna vez "Ayer he ido" en la zona de Madrid, que lo diga. Yo creo que todo el mundo diría "ayer fui".
Las otras dos frases que apuntas me parecen muy normales, en la zona de Madrid y en toda la Península salvo Galicia y Asturias


----------



## lazarus1907

e.ma said:


> Por favor, si alguien ha oído alguna vez "Ayer he ido" en la zona de Madrid, que lo diga. Yo creo que todo el mundo diría "ayer fui".
> Las otras dos frases que apuntas me parecen muy normales, en la zona de Madrid y en toda la Península salvo Galicia y Asturias


Yo lo he oído también en Cáceres, pero me sigue sonando como si me metieran una clavo ardiendo por la oreja. El pretérito perfecto se usa para referirse a una espacio temporal en la que el hablante se encuentra en el momento del enunciado, o hechos cuyas consecuencias guardan relación con el presente según la percepción subjetiva del hablante.

Según Gómez Torrego:

_...es la norma culta en el español de España (excepto Galicia, León, Asturias y Canarias, donde lo general es neutralizar la oposición a favor del pretérito perfecto simple; de hecho, no son raros en estas zonas los usos ultracorrectos del pretérito perfecto compuesto: ***Ayer lo he pasado bien.. .). Esta misma neutralización se da en la norma culta del español de América, en el que el pretérito perfecto compuesto, cuando se usa, presenta otros valores no coincidentes con los del español de España. Hay que hablar, pues, de dos normas diferentes en el empleo de los pretéritos perfectos simple y compuesto...._


----------



## e.ma

Ojo: "ultracorrectos" es "incorrectos"


----------



## e.ma

lazarus1907 said:


> Yo lo he oído también en Cáceres, pero me sigue sonando como si me metieran una clavo ardiendo por la oreja.



This feels too much sensibility for variations that, even if out of the standard, are all acceptable. See the posts around #50: everything depends. There are a lot of things I've never heard, but they wouldn't hurt me if I did. And, Spanish being such a wide language, every way of speaking it should be respected (especially when you're trying the fluffy areas of our grammar)


----------



## NewdestinyX

e.ma said:


> Por favor, si alguien ha oído alguna vez "Ayer he ido" en la zona de Madrid, que lo diga. Yo creo que todo el mundo diría "ayer fui".
> Las otras dos frases que apuntas me parecen muy normales, en la zona de Madrid y en toda la Península salvo Galicia y Asturias



Lo he oído. Pero el argumento es que hay otros usos del perfecto que tampoco son estándar. Cuando una persona vuelve a casa después de ver una película -- su esposo (de Madrid) va a preguntarle "¿Te ha gustado la pelí?

¿De acuerdo? Yo oigo eso todo el tiempo en Madrid. Pero ese uso del perfecto tampoco es estándar. Lo más común (fuera de Madrid) y correcto (o sea, de mi entrenamiento) es decir "¿Te gustó la pelí?" "Ayer ha llegado..." sería lo más lejos de la norma. Pero 'te ha gustado' por 'te gustó', que yo sepa, no es estándar.


----------



## e.ma

NewdestinyX said:


> Lo he oído. Pero el argumento es que hay otros usos del perfecto que tampoco son estándar. Cuando una persona vuelve a casa después de ver una película -- su esposo (de Madrid) va a preguntarle "¿Te ha gustado la pelí?
> 
> ¿De acuerdo? Yo oigo eso todo el tiempo en Madrid.
> (¿Será que andas con gente que no es de allí? Los madrileños son asombrosamente POCOS.)
> Pero ese uso del perfecto tampoco es estándar. Lo más común (fuera de Madrid) y correcto (o sea, de mi entrenamiento) [aquí estás diciendo que sólo lo tuyo es correcto] es decir "¿Te gustó la pelí?" "Ayer ha llegado..." sería lo más lejos de la norma. Pero 'te ha gustado' por 'te gustó', que yo sepa, no es estándar.



  pues para mí, decir "¿Te gustó la peli que acabas de ver?" es tan poco estándar como decir "Ayer ha llegado..."; pero insisto en que todo ello es de concepto elástico, y no hay que sufrir por ello como si fuera erróneo.


----------



## JB

Estimados foreros:
The original question of this thread has already been dealt with, in the first page of this discussion, and this thread has now become excessively long, and has wandered into other areas, as well. 
To further analyze different uses of _pretérito perfecto_ and _pretérito indefinido_ in Spanish, we invite you to open other threads. 
Thank you all for your participation.  This thread is now closed
JBruceIsmay, et al.
Moderators


----------

