I have lived / I have been living ...

Pitt

Senior Member
German
Hi everybody!

I'd like to know if both sentences are correct:

1. I live in London >
2. I have lived in London since 1990.

3. I am living in London >
4. I have been living in London since 1990.

Thanks for helping me!
 
  • peptidoglycan

    Senior Member
    Turkish
    Yes. They are both correct. Actually, both sentences are given as such examples in some references that sometimes present perfect and present perfect continuous tenses can both be used.
     

    Brioche

    Senior Member
    Australia English
    Hi everybody!

    I'd like to know if both sentences are correct:

    1. I live in London >
    2. I have lived in London since 1990.

    3. I am living in London >
    4. I have been living in London since 1990.

    Thanks for helping me!
    The so-called progressive forms anticipate that the situation will change.

    I live in London. I'll never leave.

    She has lived in London since 1950, and I can't imagine she would ever move.

    We are living in London until September, then we are moving to Chester.

    I have been living in London since 1990. Every year the noise and the crowds get worse. I think I'll move back to Winchester.
     

    susanna76

    Senior Member
    Romanian
    Hi there,

    I'd be curious to hear some other opinions on Present Perfect Simple and Present Perfect Continuous, because one of my grammar books is at odds with Brioche's statement. This book gives the following:

    I've lived here for years. (I'll be moving soon.)
    I've been living here for years. (I'm staying.)

    So which one indicates future change then?

    Thanks!
     

    Stanis

    New Member
    Russian
    According to our grammar books Present Perfect Durative (I have lived) is less popular Present Perfect Continuous Durative (I have been living). The former is said to be using with mostly stative verbs (know, be etc.) whilst the latter is more common because it refers to the situation in progress that started a while ago (How long? Since when?). Some cases 'can be optional'- with the verbs 'live' and 'work'. I have lived/worked= I have been living/working. Plus,'I have lived' can be said when you are already standing at the doorway with your suitcases packed (like Susanna mentioned) . Is that correct?
     

    iconoclast

    Senior Member
    english - anglo-irish
    For sure, with stative verbs and dual-function verbs used statively there's no choice but present perfect simple [I've known her all my life, She's had that dog for years], while for clearly dynamic verbs present perfect continuous is more common [He's been swimming all his life (but also: He's swum all his life), They've been banging on the door since they arrived). However, verbs like 'live, work, study' are a tad ambivalent - living, for example, is a permanent yet simultaneously ongoing feature of our existence. Similarly, work is, we trust, also a permanent feature - a non-developmental idea which would normally prompt the selection of a non-continuous tense [What do you do?] - yet simultaneously a good job provides the opportunity for challenge and growth - a developmental idea which would normally prompt the selection of a continuous tense. Thus, for 'live, work, study' at least, in the context of duration there's not really very much difference between present perfect simple and present perfect continuous, e.g.

    1. She's worked as a marine biologist all her life.
    2. she's been working as a marine biologist all her life.
     

    Stanis

    New Member
    Russian
    That clarifies a lot, thank you, Iconiclast. What are dual function verbs? Like 'feel /look?' or 'tell/say'? In the first case the verbs can be both dynamic and stative and in the second case they are allowed to be used as statives in speech (again, if the textbooks are right'.
     

    iconoclast

    Senior Member
    english - anglo-irish
    Hello, Stanis. By dual dunction, I mean verbs that may be used either dynamically or statively, like 'have, taste', e.g.

    stative
    1. He has a pool in his backyard.
    2. *He's having a pool in his backyard.
    3. This lasagna tastes wonderful.
    4 *This lasagna's tasting wonderful.

    dynamic
    1. We have a fancy-dress party every autumn.
    2. We're having our fancy-dress party this weekend.
    3. Winetasters taste but do not swallow the wine.
    4. They're down in the cellar tasting the claret.
     

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    I'd be curious to hear some other opinions on Present Perfect Simple and Present Perfect Continuous, because one of my grammar books is at odds with Brioche's statement. This book gives the following:

    I've lived here for years. (I'll be moving soon.)
    I've been living here for years. (I'm staying.)

    So which one indicates future change then?
    I agree with Brioche, and disagree with your book.

    The distinction is by no means hard and fast, but we tend to use the progressive for something seen as liable to change.
     

    Stanis

    New Member
    Russian
    Hello, Iconoclast, and thanks again :)
    Here we are taught that some stative verbs can be dynamic when they have other meaning (like think= 'believe' is stative (but I am thinking about it'), have = 'possess' is stative (and dynamic in other cases), taste = 'have a taste' is stative, but he's tasting the soup. Guess='think' is stative and appear= 'seem' is stative etc)
    Feel, look, ache and hurt are said to be both stative and dynamic bearing the same meaning. I am feeling good now=I feel good now.It hurts (now)= It is hurting. Are these verbs 'dual meaning verbs' too? Thanks in advance!
     

    gabriel001234

    Senior Member
    Portuguese
    I agree with Brioche, and disagree with your book.

    The distinction is by no means hard and fast, but we tend to use the progressive for something seen as liable to change.
    Can can of the forms be used with the SAME meaning? Thanks in advance.
     

    volver

    Senior Member
    french belgium
    Hello,

    I have been living in Belgium for 5 years. Does this mean that I still live there?
    I have lived in Belgium for 5 years. Does this mean that I still live there?
    I lived in Belgium for 5 years. I don't live there anymore.

    A non native speaker told me so you have been living in Belgium for 5 years.
    To me, it means that I still live there.
    I don't live in Belgium anymore but in France.
    Did the non-native speaker say it right? Is it grammatically correct even if I don't live there anymore?
    If I were the non native speaker I would have said so you lived in Belgium for 5 years?


    Thank you.

    VOLVER
     

    AnythingGoes

    Senior Member
    English - USA (Midwest/Appalachia)
    Hello,

    I have been living in Belgium for 5 years. Does this mean that I still live there? Yes.
    I have lived in Belgium for 5 years. Does this mean that I still live there? Yes.
    I lived in Belgium for 5 years. I don't live there anymore. Correct.

    A non native speaker told me so you have been living in Belgium for 5 years.
    To me, it means that I still live there. You're right.
    I don't live in Belgium anymore but in France. That's grammatically correct.
    Did the non-native speaker say it right? Is it grammatically correct even if I don't live there anymore?
    If I were the non native speaker I would have said so you lived in Belgium for 5 years?
    See above for the first questions. I don't understand the last ones.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top