# "it has been (a) long (time) (since)..." - variations



## prankstare

I intend this thread to be a bit comprehensive, since I have looked over the existing threads and I have a couple of questions in mind about this issue. I'd rather do the questions in stages, one question at a time that is, in order to make it more clear and understandable:

Q1 - Which form is correct and what do they mean? If both are correct, then what's the difference?

"_It has been a long time we have talked._"
"_It has been a long time since we have talked._"


----------



## panjandrum

In my opinion, both are wrong.


----------



## timpeac

Yes, I agree with Panj. Can you provide some example sentences where you think they would work?


----------



## la grive solitaire

In AE, the first one is incorrect; the second one is fine.


----------



## majlo

I'm much closer to BrE, but I don't see what sense the latter one might convey, be it BrE or AmE. _It has been a long time since we talked_ would be understandable to me.


----------



## timpeac

majlo said:


> I'm much closer to BrE, but I don't see what sense the latter one might convey, be it BrE or AmE. _It has been a long time since we talked_ would be understandable to me.


Yes, me too since it's a punctual event. This is ringing a bell as perhaps being a BE/AE difference.


----------



## la grive solitaire

_We haven't talked for a long time, have we?

Yes, it's [it has] been a long time since we've [we have] talked._

Of course, it could just be my AE, too! Let's see what other natives of AE think.


----------



## timpeac

la grive solitaire said:


> _We haven't talked for a long time, have we?
> 
> Yes, it's [it has] been a long time since we've [we have] talked._
> 
> Of course, it could just be my AE, too! Let's see what other natives of AE think.


I suspect there won't be a right-wrong answer to this (just differing usage) but I would equate the 2 sentences

The last time we talked was 2 years ago. It has been a long time since we talked.

If you use "have talked" would you then also say 

The last time we have talked was 2 years ago. It has been a long time since we have talked.

To me the punctual aspect is the same in both sentences. Would you ever naturally say "it has been a long time since we talked?" Following on from majlo's wondering, what would be the difference in nuance between that and "it has been a long time since we have talked"?


----------



## majlo

Riveting! I can't wait to see what other Ame speakers have to say.

To me, however, it begs past tense here as there's no relation to presence.


----------



## Wobby

"_It has been a long time we have talked._" - This would literally mean to me "We have been talking for a very long time", as if to say 'We've been talking to each other all day!", but it is not the most idiomatic way of putting it. But I doubt this was the intention anyway. 

"_It has been a long time since we have talked._" - I would use 'last' instead of 'have' to suggest that we haven't talked in a long while.

_"We haven't talked for a long time, have we?"_ - this is fine to me, in the negative, because you 'flick' only once to the state of not talking for a long while. It does not, however, work in the postive for me, because it would lead me to the interpretation I have given of the first sentence.

EDIT: Reading back and back again, especially *la grive solitaire*'s post, in that context, the second sentence seems to make more sense... maybe I'm flicking into an AE mode!  

EDIT 2: OK, it seems to make sense, but I would still say 'last' instead of 'have'. I think that it sounds wrong in isolation, and I can accept the negative for the reasons I gave above, but using the negative as a question with 'have' in it elicits a positive response with 'have' in it, so I think only in this context can I see it acceptable.


----------



## beccamutt

timpeac said:


> Yes, I agree with Panj. Can you provide some example sentences where you think they would work?


 
Sorry, have to disagree...

Although it doesn't sound too bad at first, it should be:

It has been a long time since we *talked*.

(Because the last time we talked was a specific point in time, thus simple past.)

(Or maybe it just sounds wrong because we would normally say, "since we have spoken?")


----------



## beccamutt

timpeac said:


> If you use "have talked" would you then also say
> 
> The last time we have talked was 2 years ago. It has been a long time since we have talked.


 
Please, linguists, correct me if I'm wrong but I really think _have_ is incorrect in this usage. "2 years ago" is a specific point in time, thus, you would use the simple past: The last time we talked was 2 years ago.


----------



## majlo

timpeac said:


> Following on from majlo's wondering, what would be the difference in nuance between that and "it has been a long time since we have talked"?



I interpret this as follows,

"We haven't talked for a long time." = "It has been as long time since we talked."

To use present tense to describe a past action (as the last time they talked was, say, a few years ago) is ill-formed. If the meaning in question is that they still talk, the answer is obvious, "We've been talking for a long time."

That's confusing...


----------



## timpeac

beccamutt said:


> Please, linguists, correct me if I'm wrong but I really think _have_ is incorrect in this usage. "2 years ago" is a specific point in time, thus, you would use the simple past: The last time we talked was 2 years ago.


Becca - that's precisely my point. To my mind the talking is equally punctual in both sentences so I'm asking if someone who would use "have talked" in "It's been a long time since we have talked" would also say "the last time we have talked was 2 years ago" since I personally would not use the "have" in either sentence.


----------



## la grive solitaire

timpeac said:


> To me the punctual aspect is the same in both sentences. Would you ever naturally say "it has been a long time since we talked?"



Absolutely!   But I'd still more naturally say, _It's been a long time since we've talked_...


----------



## beccamutt

timpeac said:


> Becca - that's precisely my point. To my mind the talking is equally punctual in both sentences so I'm asking if someone who would use "have talked" in "It's been a long time since we have talked" would also say "the last time we have talked was 2 years ago" since I personally would not use the "have" in either sentence.


 
Oh! Ok, thanks.   I think maybe I read your post too quickly.


----------



## majlo

la grive solitaire said:


> Absolutely!   But I'd still more naturally say, _It's been a long time since we've talked_...




But what would be your justification for using present tense if the action in question is clearly past?


----------



## beccamutt

majlo said:


> But what would be your justification for using present tense if the action in question is clearly past?


 
It has been a long time since we [last] talked

has been = present perfect (Which is not exactly the present but too complex to explain here, but found this helpful site http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html.  _Basically_, we're talking about the past but at an unspecified time.)
talked = simple past (the last time we talked was a specific point in the past)


----------



## timpeac

majlo said:


> But what would be your justification for using present tense if the action in question is clearly past?


Usage doesn't always follow nice neat grammatical logic.

It is not unusual for the grammatical form of one part of a sentence to "contaminate" another part - without wishing to derail this discussion to discuss it, I can think of the following usage that is used by many and abhorrent to others where that seems to have happened "if I would ask him he would come" for the more "traditional" "if I asked him he would come".


----------



## timpeac

beccamutt said:


> Abhorrent to my AE ears .  How about: If I were to ask him he would come.  ?


Becca - I can't moderate in this thread as I'm involved in it, but please don't take this thread down the route of discussing that. I gave it as a parallel example of where the first part of the sentence can influence the second to illustrate what may be happening in this case. We can't discuss that phenomenon in its own right - although I know there are many threads where that is the topic and it can be discussed.


----------



## majlo

Timpeac, I do realize it. It, however, doesn't change the fact that such usage, though quite common, is simply wrong in grammatical terms. 

"If I would ask him, I would..." is one of my favourite ones. Just like, "They should of gone there."


----------



## timpeac

majlo said:


> Timpeac, I do realize it. It, however, doesn't change the fact that such usage, though quite common, is simply wrong in grammatical terms.


Sorry I don't agree with this. (Isn't it ironic that I am defending the right of people to a usage that I don't actually do myself!). There is no such thing as ipso facto "wrong in grammatical terms". Grammar is a human construct of rules to help describe a language, which it will always do imperfectly. Grammar is correct or not depending on whether it fits in with the accepted "standard" form of the language (however that is defined). If all Americans, and their teachers and style-books are happy for them to say "it has been a long time since we have talked" then the impeccable logic you use that the perfect tense "should" be used only to link to the past to the present not for punctual past events counts for naught I'm afraid. 

Now, maybe that's not the case and style guides wouldn't recommend it - I don't know, it certainly is odd to my BE ears - but the fact that we are all used to the fact that the perfect tense is usually used in that way doesn't make it a grammatical fact that it must always be in all situations. Perhaps that rule needs nuancing.


----------



## majlo

Hmm, interesting. Well, I see grammar in a more unyielding perspective even though I'm aware that it will never be entirely perfect - as nothing created by a human will ever be, so to speak. 

I use grammar to back up my claims in this particular instance. 

"If all Americans, and their teachers and style-books are happy for them to say "it has been a long time since we have talked""

It begs the question - is it the case? We don't know of course, but I believe it's not. At least, one opinion is not enough. That's why I stick to my claim so persistently. But I'll happily change my mind if a whole lot of AmE _foreros _will confirm that it's natural for them to say, "It has been a long time since we have talked."  (For the record, one actually disproves that.)

All in the name of science.


----------



## prankstare

This has been going with quite a pace. I can't keep up with you, guys. 



			
				timpeac said:
			
		

> Yes, I agree with Panj. Can you provide some example sentences where you think they would work?




Hi there,

No, actually there's no context. I made up these two sentences myself. Sorry.



			
				beccamutt said:
			
		

> Please, linguists, correct me if I'm wrong but I really think have is incorrect in this usage. "2 years ago" is a specific point in time, thus, you would use the simple past: The last time we talked was 2 years ago.




Well, since there has been some confusion and actually no conclusions (so far), I guess I would rather simply trust what the best teacher I ever had in my entire life taught me (no, it's not my current teacher this time), and to whom I should pay my respects to 'till the day I die, English teacher Alessandra (currently living in Ireland) : she said that, because the given sentence itself alone does not give information about a specific time (as for when the action stopped), you must use the present perfect tense:


"_It has been a long time since we have talked."_ 
(I believe this form to be, at least, less wrong then if without the use of "since" in this sample sentence or, as already mentioned by someone else, it would have the idea of a continuous action -- still happening at this moment, it's not over, we are still talking --, which really isn't what was intended)

"_It has been a long time since the last time we talked_."  
(to my teacher's understanding, forcing the use of "since the last time" in this sentence makes it safer to write/say. Why? I can't remember her explanation; although I'm guessing it could be (note that I'm not saying she told me this) because every time we include "since the last time" in any given sentence, we would more naturally put the verb in the past tense rather than the simple past -- can somebody confirm this?)


PS: interesting fact is that I was talking to 'Primal' about this, a Canadian friend and also a contributor and a participant on this forum, and he too agrees with the use of "since" + past participle. His example sentence was as follows:

"_It has been some time since you've posted on the WordReference forums, hasn't it?_"


----------



## panjandrum

For information, other threads on this general topic area can be found by looking up a long time and since. There should be some useful information there. 		It has been a long time since we contacted each other is one of the long threads.

Looking at some of the past threads I am not sure that it will be possible to come to definitive conclusions.
"_It has been a long time we have talked._"
"_It has been a long time since we have talked._" 	

What happens if we dissect the sentences a little.
The first part, before _since_:
_- It has been a long time ..._
I have no problem with using the present perfect here.
The long time began in the past and continues to the present.
I also have no problem with another very familiar version:
_- It is a long time ..._

The second part, after _since_:
_- ... we talked.
- ... we have talked_.
I have no problem with either of these.

Now try the combinations.
_1. It is a long time since we talked.
2. It is a long time since we have talked.
3. It has been a long time since we talked.
4. It has been a long time since we have talked._

I would use any of the first three structures, depending on circumstances and depending on the past event/action, but I find (4) strange.  I think it is the repeated use of present perfect.


----------



## peptidoglycan

_1. It is a long time since we talked.
2. It is a long time since we have talked.
3. It has been a long time since we talked.
4. It has been a long time since we have talked._

I can say that all sentences (1,2,3, and 4) are used and can be regarded as correct for the casual speech. But only 1 and 3 is correct in formal writing.

But, on the other hand, the sentences given below are also correct.

_ 5. It has been a long time since I *have lived *in this city.
__6. It has been a long time since I *have had* a car. _

In 5 and 6, the verbs imply continuity. 5 and 6 can be re-written as

7._ It has been a long time since I moved this city._
8. _It has been a long time since I bought a car. _


----------



## majlo

peptidoglycan said:


> _ 5. It has been a long time since I *have lived *in this city.
> __6. It has been a long time since I *have had* a car. _
> 
> In 5 and 6, the verbs imply continuity. 5 and 6 can be re-written as
> 
> 7._ It has been a long time since I moved this city._
> 8. _It has been a long time since I bought a car. _



That's exactly what I have in mind. Compare,

_It has been a long time since we talked.
_vs
_It has been a long time since we've had a talk._


----------



## panjandrum

peptidoglycan said:


> _[...]_
> 
> But, on the other hand, the sentences given below are also correct.
> 
> _ 5. It has been a long time since I *have lived *in this city.
> __6. It has been a long time since I *have had* a car. __
> [...]_


I was carefully not using the terms correct/incorrect because I can find no reference source that defines any of these structures as correct/incorrect.

For the same reason that I would not use (4) - two present perfects - I would not use (5) or (6).


----------



## peptidoglycan

panjandrum said:


> I was carefully not using the terms correct/incorrect because I can find no reference source that defines any of these structures as correct/incorrect.
> 
> For the same reason that I would not use (4) - two present perfects - I would not use (5) or (6).



Practical English Usage, Michael Swan explains the topic.


----------



## prankstare

OK, guys. This seems to be a real difficult issue for everybody.

I have another question, a bit different this time though:

Is it okay to say "_it has been a long time since *we don't talk* to each other_" considering informal speech?


----------



## Categenesis

prankstare said:


> Is it okay to say "_it has been a long time since *we don't talk* to each other_" considering informal speech?



No... try this: "It's been a long time since we've talked to each other."


----------



## eventer289

> It begs the question - is it the case? We don't know of course, but I believe it's not. At least, one opinion is not enough. That's why I stick to my claim so persistently. But I'll happily change my mind if a whole lot of AmE _foreros _will confirm that it's natural for them to say, "It has been a long time since we have talked."  (For the record, one actually disproves that.)


The second once would be accepted from where I'm from in the States, and in fact is a structure I employ all of the time as a AmE speaker.


----------



## prankstare

But are you guys sure people don't erroneously say "... since we *don't talk* to each other" in casual speech?

I thought I had heard this form being used a lot of times watching American movies.


----------



## eventer289

prankstare said:


> OK, guys. This seems to be a real difficult issue for everybody.
> 
> I have another question, a bit different this time though:
> 
> Is it okay to say "_it has been a long time since *we don't talk* to each other_" considering informal speech?



No, it doesn't sound right. I still would say "since we haven't talked to each other." I know Portuguese and Spanish are very similar, and I can understand why you would say that if it follows the same layout as Spanish, because the sentence you wrote above would make perfect sense in Spanish.


----------



## prankstare

eventer289 said:


> No, it doesn't sound right. I still would say "since we haven't talked to each other." I know Portuguese and Spanish are very similar, and I can understand why you would say that if it follows the same layout as Spanish, because the sentence you wrote above would make perfect sense in Spanish.




Indeed, eventer289.

Thank you very much for your help (and all the rest of you who contributed as well, of course).


----------



## Categenesis

eventer289 said:


> I still would say "since we haven't talked to each other."



If you say this, you're saying that we talk all the time and there's been an interruption. e.g. the last time we didn't talk to each other for a period of time was years ago. Is that what you mean?

If you mean "It's been a long time since we've talked to each other," well, it means what it says... we haven't spoken in a long time.


----------



## eventer289

Categenesis said:


> If you say this, you're saying that we talk all the time and there's been an interruption. e.g. the last time we didn't talk to each other for a period of time was years ago. Is that what you mean?
> 
> If you mean "It's been a long time since we've talked to each other," well, it means what it says... we haven't spoken in a long time.



That may be so, but the truth of the matter is that "since we haven't talked" has come to mean in common spoken English that the two people haven't talked in a long time. It sounds perfectly normal to me and I hear that construction everyday to mean "since we have talked."


----------



## Categenesis

eventer289 said:


> That may be so, but the truth of the matter is that "since we haven't talked" has come to mean in common spoken English that the two people haven't talked in a long time. It sounds perfectly normal to me and I hear that construction everyday to mean "since we have talked."



Glad I moved.


----------



## prankstare

People, another variation I'd like to ask is what would happen if I take the word "since" out of the sentence. As in:

"_It has been a long time I haven't talked to her_"

Does this make any sense? Is it grammatical?


----------



## peptidoglycan

prankstare said:


> People, another variation I'd like to ask is what happens if I take the word "since" out of the sentence. As in:
> 
> "_It has been a long time I haven't talked to her_"
> 
> Does this make any sense? Is it grammatical?



It doesn't sound fine.


----------



## prankstare

peptidoglycan said:


> "_It has been a long time I haven't talked to her_"
> It doesn't sound fine.




Hum, how about say:

"_It has been a long time I have talked to her_"

Maybe?


----------



## sasako

But would´nt this change the meaning?
It has been a long time I have talked to hear, with other words, I talked to her for hours and hours?


----------



## prankstare

sasako said:


> But would´nt this change the meaning?
> It has been a long time I have talked to hear, with other words, I talked to her for hours and hours?




I don't know. Perhaps? 

Could somebody give us a help with this?


----------



## zelis

I think Sasako is right. The meaning of «It has been a long time I haven't talked to her» is something like this: I talked to her, the last time, a long time ago and no more so far.


----------



## prankstare

Oops,

My last question has already been answered by Wobby in post #10.



Wobby said:


> "*It has been a long time we have talked.*" - This would literally mean to me "We have been talking for a very long time", as if to say 'We've been talking to each other all day!", but it is not the most idiomatic way of putting it. But I doubt this was the intention anyway.
> 
> "_It has been a long time since we have talked._" - I would use 'last' instead of 'have' to suggest that we haven't talked in a long while.
> 
> _"We haven't talked for a long time, have we?"_ - this is fine to me, in the negative, because you 'flick' only once to the state of not talking for a long while. It does not, however, work in the postive for me, because it would lead me to the interpretation I have given of the first sentence.




My bad.


----------

