# I have been studying/studied/have studied



## Monica238

I have learnt that for the context of changing to a new course, once my last day is finished I can say "I have been studying English/I have studied English/I studied English for the last two years but tomorrow I start my new course." Either tense can be used by a native speaker. 
But are  all three tenses used before my last day is on the course is finished? If I tell my friend: "I have been studying/studied/have studied English for the last two years but now I am switching to a new course." Are present perfect continuous, present perfect and past simple correct?


----------



## Glasguensis

I wouldn’t use simple past when it’s not yet in the past. Provided it’s after your last lesson it would be okay, even if it’s the same day.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> I wouldn’t use simple past when it’s not yet in the past. Provided it’s after your last lesson it would be okay, even if it’s the same day.


That's exactly what I find confusing. In this situation below it's not yet in the past, however  past simple can be used.  Or perhaps it is in the past because "my last day is finished"? "I have been studying English/I have studied English/I studied English for the last two years but tomorrow I start my new course." Is this the difference between BrE and AmE? Or does it simply depend on each native speaker?


----------



## Glasguensis

How do you know it's not yet finished ? I don't think even AE speakers would use simple past if they were still performing the action.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> How do you know it's not yet finished ? I don't think even AE speakers would use simple past if they were still performing the action.


I don't remember the source of the explanation, but it says once my last day is finished I can say: "I have been studying English/I have studied English/I studied English for the last two years but tomorrow I start my new course."  If the last day is finished then I am no longer studying English. Maybe that's why past simple is acceptable there?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> I have learnt that for the context of changing to a new course, once my last day is finished I can say "I have been studying English/I have studied English/I studied English for the last two years


You appear to have been given poor advice. Use the present perfect when your course has *not *finished. The present perfect with a time period is used for something that began in the past and continues up to the present. It might have just finished (today, perhaps). You might regard it as continuing to the beginning of the next academic year even though classes ended a couple of months ago, but if you regard it as finished and in the past, then don't use the present perfect.

You cannot (generally) use the past tense for something that still continues in the present.

Most of the time, there is a pretty clear dividing line between using the present perfect and using the past tense.

I find it curious that you have omitted the past continuous. This is probably more likely than the simple past tense for something that was done over a period of time and ended recently: I was studying English for two years up to the end of last term, but tomorrow I begin my new course in Ancient Greek.

Edit: If your new course is also an English course, then your studying English continues, and so you would not be likely to use the past tense. You began your studies in English two years ago and they will continue into the future. it does not matter that one course has ended and another is just about to begin; the sentence is not about a particular course.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> You appear to have been given poor advice. Use the present perfect when your course has *not *finished. The present perfect with a time period is used for something that began in the past and continues up to the present. It might have just finished (today, perhaps). You might regard it as continuing to the beginning of the next academic year even though classes ended a couple of months ago, but if you regard it as finished and in the past, then don't use the present perfect.
> 
> You cannot (generally) use the past tense for something that still continues in the present.
> 
> Most of the time, there is a pretty clear dividing line between using the present perfect and using the past tense.
> 
> I find it curious that you have omitted the past continuous. This is probably more likely than the simple past tense for something that was done over a period of time and ended recently: I was studying English for two years up to the end of last term, but tomorrow I begin my new course in Ancient Greek.


You are right. Regarding the poor advice. I didn't  understand it at all. 

You said "You might regard it as continuing to the beginning of the next academic year even though classes ended a couple of months ago, but if you regard it as finished and in the past, then don't use the present perfect." Do you mean if I continue studying in the next term or year using  present perfect would be correct?


----------



## Glasguensis

Let's say for the sake of argument that your English classes are from 9am until 4pm. Up until 4pm on the last day you can use the present perfect and the present perfect continuous. After 4pm you can still use the present perfect and the present perfect continuous, but now you can also use the simple past (or indeed the past continuous).


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> You are right. Regarding the poor advice. I didn't  understand it at all.
> 
> You said "You might regard it as continuing to the beginning of the next academic year even though classes ended a couple of months ago, but if you regard it as finished and in the past, then don't use the present perfect." Do you mean if I continue studying in the next term or year using  present perfect would be correct?


If you one academic year has ended and the next one has not yet begun, any subject that you studied previously and will study again in the new academic year can be considered as if there is no interruption, even though you will be in a different class, and maybe a different institution, and you can still use the present perfect. It is only if you refer to something that is specifically finished that you would use the past tense. So, for example, you could say "I studied English at school for two years and now I am going to study it at university," for example. However, if you don't mention "at school", you can say "I have been studying English for two years and now I am going to study it at university."


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> Let's say for the sake of argument that your English classes are from 9am until 4pm. Up until 4pm on the last day you can use the present perfect and the present perfect continuous. After 4pm you can still use the present perfect and the present perfect continuous, but now you can also use the simple past (or indeed the past continuous).


Sorry, what do you mean by "now you can also use the simple past (or indeed the past continuous). If I don't study English anymore, it's still the last day, the day hasn't finished, it's after 5pm either present perfect or present perfect continuous   work  but  past simple is also  correct. Up until 4pm either present perfect or present perfect continuous work, but not past simple. Right?


----------



## Glasguensis

Yes.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> Yes.


The explanations I have received from both of you are clear.
This part of another explanation  from another resource is unclear. "I have been studying English for the last two years, but now I am switching to a new course" can be used at any point after I made the decision to change courses but before my last day is finished." What does it mean "before the last day is finished"? It could be as you said in your example after 4pm,  in that case either present perfect, present perfect continuous and past simple are used as you agreed in the previous post, but in that explanation I also read "Once my  last day is finished I can say I have studied, I have been studying, I studied."  What exactly is meant by "once my day is finished" it can refer to the evening or even the next day. If it's the evening as you confirmed the time after 4pm either past simple, present perfect or present perfect continuous work, but if it's said the next day, then only past simple is correct, isn't it?


----------



## Glasguensis

That explanation is incorrect. "I have been studying English for the last two years, but now I am switching to a new course" can be used at any point after the decision to change courses, but right up until the end of first class of the new subject.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> That explanation is incorrect. "I have been studying English for the last two years, but now I am switching to a new course" can be used at any point after the decision to change courses, but right up until the end of first class of the new subject.


Because until  the first class starts my English course is still a recent past   but when the new class finishes my English course belongs in the past. Right?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> Because until  the first class starts my English course is still a recent past   but when the new class finishes my English course belongs in the past. Right?


No. "I have been studying English for the last two years, but now I am switching to a new course" talks about two things:

You started studing English two years ago and this studying continues up to the present.
You will be in the immediate future or are now in the present switching to a new course.
The first part ("I have been studying English for the last two years") is not affected by your switching course. There is no sense that you have stopped studying English in the short break between the two courses, and your studying English would generally be considered a continuous activity from two years ago to whenever the new course ends at some point in the future.

However, the second part of the sentence ("now I am switching to a new course") can only be said between deciding to do a new course and the new course starting, and it is this that Glasguensis is referring to by "at any point after the decision to change courses, but right up until the end of first class of the new subject." Personally, I would put the end point of being able to say this at the beginning of the first class rather than the end of the first class, but perhaps Glasguensis is thinking of a scenario that has not occurred to me.


----------



## Glasguensis

I was thinking of the scenario where you explain in the class what you're doing there. To me it would be acceptable to use the present continuous, although once you're at the class the simple past would also be possible.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> I was thinking of the scenario where you explain in the class what you're doing there. To me it would be acceptable to use the present continuous, although once you're at the class the simple past would also be possible.View attachment 61634


Thank you so much for the diagram!!! Thus, both  work as you have previously explained in a situation when I say on my last day: "I have been studying/I have studied/ but not "I studied English", with the classes that continue  until 4pm. Up until 4pm either present perfect or present perfect continuous work, but not past simple.  But   after 4pm either present perfect or present perfect continuous work but past simple is also correct. Right? Sorry, that I have to ask again, but the use of these tenses isn't easy.


----------



## old woman

Uncle Jack said:


> Use the present perfect when your course has *not *finished. The present perfect with a time period is used for something that began in the past and continues up to the present. It might have just finished (today, perhaps).


In the first sentence you say "when your course has not finished". Then you say "it might have just finished". Isn't this a contradiction? Or do you mean it can be used both when the course has not finished or has just finished?


----------



## old woman

Uncle Jack said:


> You might regard it as continuing to the beginning of the next academic year even though classes ended a couple of months ago


I don't understand. If classes ended some months ago, how can you regard it as continuing into the next year? Do you mean if you continue to study the same subject, English in this case? Like you explained in #9?


----------



## Uncle Jack

old woman said:


> In the first sentence you say "when your course has not finished". Then you say "it might have just finished". Isn't this a contradiction? Or do you mean it can be used both when the course has not finished or has just finished?


Easily the most common reason for using the present perfect with a time period is because the thing still continues in the present. However, you can also, in a far more limited set of circumstances, use the present perfect with a time period for something that has just finished.


old woman said:


> I don't understand. If classes ended some months ago, how can you regard it as continuing into the next year? Do you mean if you continue to study the same subject, English in this case? Like you explained in #9?


It depends on how you phrase it. If all you say is that you are studying English, without mentioning any particular class or institution, then you can treat several classes at different institutions as one continuous period of study. 

Gaps between academic years are something of an oddity, and it is possible to include the time up to the beginning of the next academic year as part of the previous academic year. It would therefore be possible to say "I have been studying English for two years" even after you stop studying English at the end of the previous academic year (and don't intend studying it in the next academic year), provided the new academic year has not yet started. I cannot think of any other use of the present perfect with a time period so long after the activity actually ended.


----------



## old woman

Uncle Jack said:


> It would therefore be possible to say "I have been studying English for two years" even after you stop studying English at the end of the previous academic year (and don't intend studying it in the next academic year), provided the new academic year has not yet started.


In that case I would use past simple, the studying is over and done with. Is past simple also possible in this case?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Certainly. You cannot use the past tense for something that is still ongoing (not without using the present tense as well), but it is fine if the thing has actually stopped. In most situations there is a short overlap between being able to use the present perfect and the past tense, but in this situation at the end of a course of study, the overlap can be far longer.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> Certainly. You cannot use the past tense for something that is still ongoing (not without using the present tense as well), but it is fine if the thing has actually stopped. In most situations there is a short overlap between being able to use the present perfect and the past tense, but in this situation at the end of a course of study, the overlap can be far longer.


I have a question, if you please.
"I have been studying English for two years" even after you stop studying English at the end of the previous academic year (and don't intend studying it in the next academic year), provided the new academic year has not yet started."

How long  should the time frame (between the end and the start of a new course) be to make it possible to use present perfect continuous in both cases  if I stopped or continue  studying English? Or did you mean it's possible to use it only if the next term hasn't started yet? But it doesn't matter whether or not I continue studying it?


----------



## Uncle Jack

In England, academic years run from September to July. University academic years tend to be shorter than this, and I think exams still mostly take place in June. A person who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for three years." They would probably not be able to say this at the end of September.


----------



## Glasguensis

The relationship is not one of elapsed time : it is relative to the start of the next year of study. This might be two weeks or six months, depending on the organisation of the academic year.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> In England, academic years run from September to July. University academic years tend to be shorter than this, and I think exams still mostly take place in June. A person who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for three years." They would probably not be able to say this at the end of September.


And present perfect would also work instead of present continuous. Right?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> And present perfect would also work instead of present continuous. Right?


You mean the present perfect continuous? Use the simple present perfect if you want to talk about your proficiency. Use the present perfect continuous to talk about what you have been doing for the previous three years, or to emphasise the duration of your studying.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> You mean the present perfect continuous? Use the simple present perfect if you want to talk about your proficiency. Use the present perfect continuous to talk about what you have been doing for the previous three years, or to emphasise the duration of your studying.


Yes, I do. I mean the book says either can be used with verbs "live  and "work" but can either be used in the context we are talking about? Depending on the situation where the person is still studying or has stopped studying and the course hasn't started yet.


----------



## Glasguensis

Studying in this case is a variation on working : whatever the book says about working also applies to studying.

So yes, I have been studying also works.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> Studying in this case is a variation on working : whatever the book says about working also applies to studying.
> 
> So yes, I have been studying also works.


 Sorry, I mean "I have studied" instead of "I have been studying". Do you mean "I have studied" also works?

In this situation "A person who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying/*I have studied*  English for three years."


----------



## Glasguensis

Both work.


----------



## Monica238

Glasguensis said:


> Both work.


The book mentions only two verbs. Are there other verbs that can be used like "study" and "work" with either the present perfect and present perfect continuous?


----------



## Glasguensis

Yes. Anything which essentially is equivalent to one or the other:
To work, to study, to play, to exercise, to swim…
To live, to stay, to holiday,…


----------



## Uncle Jack

I suggest you don't think in such rigid terms of which verb uses which form, but try to get a feel for situations where simple and continuous forms are used.

The present perfect with a duration is mostly used to indicate how long an action was done for, or how long the current state has existed. Mostly with action verbs, the emphasis is on duration, which is a common reason for using a continuous verb form. Stative verbs don't usually use continuous verb forms, and the simple form is used instead. There are exceptions to both.

Stative verbs are probably simplest. A few stative verbs, such as "live", have the option of simple or continuous forms, and there isn't much difference between them. The most important thing to note is that continuous forms are used for temporary situations, and if a state is permanent, then you probably cannot use a continuous form. I cannot think, for example, why anyone would say "I have been living in France all my life," whereas "I have been living in France for five years" would be fine.

Action verbs are a little more complicated. Simple forms are often used to indicate more of a state than an action. "I have worked in finance for 30 years" does not really focus on the work that the person does, but the unchanging nature of it. The period of time is usually quite long, often years. In some ways, studying is like working, and if the focus is on being a member of a university, for example, or attending lectures and tutorials, rather than the action of studying, you might use the present perfect simple for "study" in the same way that it is commonly used for "work".

There is a second reason for using simple forms with action verbs, though, and this is when the time has a significance of its own, and isn't merely the length of time you have been doing the action. One example of this is where the duration is being used to indicate experience, proficiency or something like that, and this may well be the case with "study". You might, for example, say "I have studied English for three years" as a way of saying that my proficiency in English is what you would expect from someone who has studied English for three years. Incidentally, this use of the present perfect is far more flexible in the time requirement, and does not require the action to have continued up to the present, although it does need to refer to a reasonably recent time period.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> I suggest you don't think in such rigid terms of which verb uses which form, but try to get a feel for situations where simple and continuous forms are used.
> 
> The present perfect with a duration is mostly used to indicate how long an action was done for, or how long the current state has existed. Mostly with action verbs, the emphasis is on duration, which is a common reason for using a continuous verb form. Stative verbs don't usually use continuous verb forms, and the simple form is used instead. There are exceptions to both.
> 
> Stative verbs are probably simplest. A few stative verbs, such as "live", have the option of simple or continuous forms, and there isn't much difference between them. The most important thing to note is that continuous forms are used for temporary situations, and if a state is permanent, then you probably cannot use a continuous form. I cannot think, for example, why anyone would say "I have been living in France all my life," whereas "I have been living in France for five years" would be fine.
> 
> Action verbs are a little more complicated. Simple forms are often used to indicate more of a state than an action. "I have worked in finance for 30 years" does not really focus on the work that the person does, but the unchanging nature of it. The period of time is usually quite long, often years. In some ways, studying is like working, and if the focus is on being a member of a university, for example, or attending lectures and tutorials, rather than the action of studying, you might use the present perfect simple for "study" in the same way that it is commonly used for "work".
> 
> There is a second reason for using simple forms with action verbs, though, and this is when the time has a significance of its own, and isn't merely the length of time you have been doing the action. One example of this is where the duration is being used to indicate experience, proficiency or something like that, and this may well be the case with "study". You might, for example, say "I have studied English for three years" as a way of saying that my proficiency in English is what you would expect from someone who has studied English for three years. Incidentally, this use of the present perfect is far more flexible in the time requirement, and does not require the action to have continued up to the present, although it does need to refer to a reasonably recent time period.



Thank you so much! If  don't refer to a reasonably recent time then I wouldn't use "I have studied English"  and say "I studied English" instead. Right? I understand "I have studied English" to refer  to experience and the person still speaks English but "I studied English" isn't a  recent action and the person probably doesn't speak English now. Right?


----------



## Glasguensis

Wrong. Leaving aside this example, the present perfect is used for
1. When a time period is specified, something that continues up to the present or very recent past : I have worked here for two years 
2. Something which has happened at least once in the past : I have been to New York

The simple past can be used for anything in the past : I went to New York in 2000.

Returning to the example, I have studied English for two years means that the studying is ongoing or finished very recently. I studied English for two years tells us that the studying has ended, but not when, and it tells us nothing about the level I had at the end of the studying or now.


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> Thank you so much! If  don't refer to a reasonably recent time then I wouldn't use "I have studied English"  and say "I studied English" instead. Right? I understand "I have studied English" to refer  to experience and the person still speaks English but "I studied English" isn't a  recent action and the person probably doesn't speak English now. Right?



Are you talking about "I (have) studied English" with or without a duration? Without a duration, the present perfect simple "I have studied English" just conveys the "significance in the present meaning", and in BrE, your studying English could have taken place decades ago if it has some significance in the present. I am not sure what criteria AmE speakers use.

"I have studied English for two years" (present perfect simple) might possibly be used beyond the academic year in which you completed your studies (if it has significance in the present), but not for that long afterwards; the experience needs to be reasonably recent. You can always use "I studied English for two years" if your studying is over.

[Cross-posted]


----------



## IlyaTretyakov

Uncle Jack said:


> Are you talking about "I (have) studied English" with or without a duration? Without a duration, the present perfect simple "I have studied English" just conveys the "significance in the present meaning", and in BrE, your studying English could have taken place decades ago if it has some significance in the present. I am not sure what criteria AmE speakers use.
> 
> "I have studied English for two years" (present perfect simple) might possibly be used beyond the academic year in which you completed your studies (if it has significance in the present), but not for that long afterwards; the experience needs to be reasonably recent. You can always use "I studied English for two years" if your studying is over.
> 
> [Cross-posted]


Does it turn out that in the first sentence the period _isn't over_, and _it started 23 years ago _(no other alternative).
But in the second sentence the period _is probably over_, and it _may have started 23 years ago *or much earlier*_ and finished strictly 23 years after, right?

"These 3 American men *have invaded* 9 countries _*in*_* 23 years*, killed 11 million civilians and no one calls them 'war criminals'..." (found from a German on Twitter)
"These 3 American men *invaded* 9 countries _*in*_* 23 years*, killed 11 million civilians and no one calls them 'war criminals'..."


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> Are you talking about "I (have) studied English" with or without a duration? Without a duration, the present perfect simple "I have studied English" just conveys the "significance in the present meaning", and in BrE, your studying English could have taken place decades ago if it has some significance in the present. I am not sure what criteria AmE speakers use.
> 
> "I have studied English for two years" (present perfect simple) might possibly be used beyond the academic year in which you completed your studies (if it has significance in the present), but not for that long afterwards; the experience needs to be reasonably recent. You can always use "I studied English for two years" if your studying is over.
> 
> [Cross-posted]




Yes, I meant both with  and without duration.  So "I have studied English" without duration "for two years" could have taken place decades ago but if it has some significance I can use it.  But "I have studied English for two years" can be used if it's recent unlike the previous example,  not decades ago. And probably has significance.
 "I studied English" and "I studied English for two years" tell us it's over. 

But none of them tell us anything about the level.  I mean "I have studied English," I have studied English for two years," "I studied English", "I studied English for two years". 
Is everything correct?


----------



## Uncle Jack

IlyaTretyakov said:


> Does it turn out that in the first sentence the period _isn't over_, and _it started 23 years ago _(no other alternative).
> But in the second sentence the period _is probably over_, and it _may have started 23 years ago *or much earlier*_ and finished strictly 23 years after, right?
> 
> "These 3 American men *have invaded* 9 countries _*in*_* 23 years*, killed 11 million civilians and no one calls them 'war criminals'..." (found from a German on Twitter)
> "These 3 American men *invaded* 9 countries _*in*_* 23 years*, killed 11 million civilians and no one calls them 'war criminals'..."


Yes. This is the usual use of the present perfect with a time period and the past tense with a time period.



Monica238 said:


> Yes, I meant both with  and without duration.  So "I have studied English" without duration "for two years" could have taken place decades ago but if it has some significance I can use it.  But "I have studied English for two years" can be used if it's recent unlike the previous example,  not decades ago. And probably has significance.
> "I studied English" and "I studied English for two years" tell us it's over.
> 
> But none of them tell us anything about the level.  I mean "I have studied English," I have studied English for two years," "I studied English", "I studied English for two years".
> Is everything correct?


The past tense says that the action is over, yes. The present perfect without a duration, when it refers to an action in the past, also says that it is over.

You can use "I have studied English for two years" or "I studied English for two years" as an indication of your level of proficiency in English, if you want. If you don't think this is a good measure of your proficiency, then don't use it, and describe your proficiency in some other way instead.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> Yes. This is the usual use of the present perfect with a time period and the past tense with a time period.
> 
> 
> The past tense says that the action is over, yes. The present perfect without a duration, when it refers to an action in the past, also says that it is over.
> 
> You can use "I have studied English for two years" or "I studied English for two years" as an indication of your level of proficiency in English, if you want. If you don't think this is a good measure of your proficiency, then don't use it, and describe your proficiency in some other way instead.



That's exactly what I was trying to find out.  Which of them indicate the level? Or which of them indicate that the speaker still speaks English? "I have studied English," I have studied English for two years," "I studied English", "I studied English for two years".


----------



## Glasguensis

Monica238 said:


> That's exactly what I was trying to find out.  Which of them indicate the level? Or which of them indicate that the speaker still speaks English? "I have studied English," I have studied English for two years," "I studied English", "I studied English for two years".


None indicate the level or whether the person has retained any of what was studied. Someone could study English for two years and not know a word of English at the end of it. If you want to convey this additional meaning you have to do so explicitly.


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> That's exactly what I was trying to find out.  Which of them indicate the level? Or which of them indicate that the speaker still speaks English? "I have studied English," I have studied English for two years," "I studied English", "I studied English for two years".


Studying is not the same as speaking, and I suggest you don't use "study" if what you want to say is whether or not a person actually speaks English.

Expressing a level of ability or proficiency by means of a duration is quite common, however flawed it may be. Saying that you have so many years' experience doing something is particulaly common, even though your experience may have been no more than doing exactly the same thing every day. Using a duration of study is less common, since there are usually better measures available, such as a level of attainment. However, one possible answer to a question about your proficiency in a subject is to say how long you have studied it for.


----------



## old woman

Uncle Jack said:


> a reasonably recent time period.


How recent is recent?


----------



## Uncle Jack

old woman said:


> How recent is recent?


A good question. No more than a year, but in reality probably no more than a few months. This is far longer than is usually allowed for using the present perfect with a time period, where we don't generally expect it to be used after the situation ceased for more than a day or two. Or for a few minutes if you are talking about something that lasted a couple of hours.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> A good question. No more than a year, but in reality probably no more than a few months. This is far longer than is usually allowed for using the present perfect with a time period, where we don't generally expect it to be used after the situation ceased for more than a day or two. Or for a few minutes if you are talking about something that lasted a couple of hours.



Regarding this explanation:
"In England, academic years run from September to July. University academic years tend to be shorter than this, and I think exams still mostly take place in June. A person who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for three years." They would probably not be able to say this at the end of September."

Would a native speaker use both present perfect simple and present perfect continuous if they have just completed their university degree but have not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for two years, or/and if they stopped studying English and aren't going to study it anymore?


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> Would a native speaker use both present perfect simple and present perfect continuous if they have just completed their university degree but have not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for two years, or/and if they stopped studying English and aren't going to study it anymore?


In August, yes. It very much depends on what the speaker wants to convey. It might well be said in a job interview, for example, where the speaker does not want to indicate a break between their studying and their applying for the job. If, on the other hand, the speaker has already found a job and is now doing something else after spending two years studying, then they would probably use the past tense.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> In August, yes. It very much depends on what the speaker wants to convey. It might well be said in a job interview, for example, where the speaker does not want to indicate a break between their studying and their applying for the job. If, on the other hand, the speaker has already found a job and is now doing something else after spending two years studying, then they would probably use the past tense.


No, I didn't mean the speaker has already found a new job and is doing something else. I meant  they have just completed their university degree but have not yet embarked on any other work or study,  or they completed  studying it and aren't going to study it anymore next term. He is saying that in August: "I have been studying English for two years" and "I have studied English for two years". Right?


----------



## se16teddy

Monica238 said:


> Would a native speaker


The question is phrased in a way that does not take much account of the huge potential for spin, exaggeration, habit, and personal preference.
The grammar rule is: the present perfect continuous tense indicates that the action *occupied a period* that continued to the present.
But it does not imply that the action occupied the *whole* of that period. It only implies that the action was* reasonably continual or continuous* through the period. So the last instance of the action may have happened a long time before the present.
There are no legal guidelines on the point at which the action becomes discontinuous, or the point at which "a long time before" becomes misleading, or when it becomes a downright lie! It is a matter of fact for the jury to decide in each case, based on all the circumstances, not a question of law.


----------



## Uncle Jack

Monica238 said:


> I meant they have just completed their university degree but have not yet embarked on any other work or study, or they completed studying it and aren't going to study it anymore next term. He is saying that in August: "I have been studying English for two years" and "I have studied English for two years". Right?


Right to what? Both sentences are possible, as are "I have studied English for two years" and "I was studying English for two years". The present perfect continuous includes a "continues up to the present" element which the past tense does not. The present perfect simple probably also includes this, but it might be that "for two years" indicate something other than just a time period, such as a level of proficiency, if the context indicates this, but this use is unusual.


----------



## Monica238

Uncle Jack said:


> Right to what? Both sentences are possible, as are "I have studied English for two years" and "I was studying English for two years". The present perfect continuous includes a "continues up to the present" element which the past tense does not. The present perfect simple probably also includes this, but it might be that "for two years" indicate something other than just a time period, such as a level of proficiency, if the context indicates this, but this use is unusual.



Sorry, I meant  if either tense can be used in your example in this explanation:
"In England, academic years run from September to July. University academic years tend to be shorter than this, and I think exams still mostly take place in June. A person who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study might say, in August, "I have been studying English for three years/*I* *have* *studied* *English*  *for* *two* *years*" 

My sentence "I have studied English for two years". Marked by astericks.



You said "who has just completed their university degree but has not yet embarked on any other work or study" and I meant to ask meant they have just completed studying it and aren't going to study it anymore next term can I still use either  present perfect or present perfect continuous? "I have been studying English for two years" and  "I have studied English for two years"?


----------



## Glasguensis

Yes, both could be used. The important thing to remember is that it would be odd to say something like this in isolation. The other things which you say before and after could have an influence on which form would be the most natural, even though the facts are the same.


----------



## Elle Paris

Monica238 said:


> I have learnt that for the context of changing to a new course, once my last day is finished I can say "I have been studying English/I have studied English/I studied English for the last two years but tomorrow I start my new course." Either tense can be used by a native speaker.
> But are  all three tenses used before my last day is on the course is finished? If I tell my friend: "I have been studying/studied/have studied English for the last two years but now I am switching to a new course." Are present perfect continuous, present perfect and past simple correct?


When the moment/time period of the studies is over, you should use simple past tense/preterite "I studied French for two years." but if you are STILL studying French(and it has been continuous for the past two years) you would say "I have been studying basic French for two years, and next month I will start intermediate French." On the other hand you would say "I have studied several languages (understood: before).


----------

