When + pr. Perfect Continous

< Previous | Next >

Thomasage

Senior Member
Russian
Hey there,
I read in a book that we can use any present tense after words like: after, when, as soon as etc.

Can we use present perfect continous?
Do native speakers use it in this way?

1)When I've been going to New York already for 3 hours, you'll be at work.

I made this sentence up. Does it even make any sence?


Thank you in advance:)
 
Last edited:
  • VicNicSor

    Banned
    Russian
    I'd put "already" after "hours", but apart from that it's fine. It's just the context is not very common — what you will be doing at a particular point of my journey.
     

    suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    That sentence, even with Vic's suggestions , does not sound natural to me. I think that's because there are better ways to express the idea which a native would probably use. But that's not really the point of your question.

    Focussing on your point about using "present perfect continous" after "when" let's try this:
    When I've been going to New York my family have had to look after themselves.

    That seems OK to me.

    Do you want to try another one yourself?
     

    se16teddy

    Senior Member
    English - England
    The example of #1 is rather confusing, but the present perfect continuous can be used in this way.

    When you've been teaching for a few months you'll know what "exhausted" means. :tick:
     
    Last edited:

    anahiseri

    Senior Member
    Spanish (Spain) and German (Germany)
    When I've been going to New York my family have had to look after themselves. ❌
    When I've been to New York my family have had to look after themselves. :tick:

    my opinion , but i'm not a native English speaker
     
    Last edited:

    VicNicSor

    Banned
    Russian
    When you've been teaching for teaching for a few months you'll know what "exhausted" means. :tick:
    But here the continuous could be replaced by the simple Perfect: "When you've taught for a few months ...", and the point is to say what will happen after some time passes, as a result. Whereas the point in the OP was to emphasize what will be happening at a particular point in time when another activity has already been happening for some time.

    When I've just started my journey to NY, you'll still be sleeping.
    When I've been going to NY for 2 hours, you'll be leaving for work.
    When I've been going to NY for 3 hours, you'll be at work.
     

    Oddmania

    Senior Member
    French
    I, personally, have a hard time making sense of "I've been going to New York for X hours" (let alone "When I've been going to NY for 3 hours, you'll be doing such and such..."). I don't think the P.P. continuous tense really works here.

    Three hours after I've left for NY, you'll still be at work.
    When I'm three-hours into my trip to NY, you'll be working
    (a little convoluted).​

    However, I suppose you might say "When I've been living here for 10 years, I'll be able to apply for citizenship", but like Suzi I don't think that would sound very natural to native speakers.
     

    suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    When I've been going to New York my family have had to look after themselves. ❌
    When I've been to New York my family have had to look after themselves. :tick:

    my opinion , but i'm not a native English speaker
    :D

    Thanks for that.
    Speaking as a native speaker I would say the first one. It carries an implication of lots of visits.
     

    velisarius

    Senior Member
    British English (Sussex)
    Only after I've been flying to New York for three hours will you have arrived at the office.

    I think "only when..." and "only after..." produce useable sentences.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top