Timeline for "MODAL + HAVE BEEN + ING VERB" expresses an ongoing action which finished or lasts from the past up to now?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2021 at 10:47 | comment | added | Xwtek | For some reason, I used modal have been V-ing as inferential evidential. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 15:45 | vote | accept | Tom | ||
| Jan 30, 2017 at 16:13 | |||||
| Jan 30, 2017 at 15:18 | comment | added | Kate Bunting | "The baby must have been sleeping [then]" doesn't imply anything about whether he/she is still asleep now. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 15:16 | answer | added | Colin Fine | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 15:12 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | (1) 'They have been talking for the last hour.' : your diagram applies. // (2a) 'They should have been talking for the last hour.': it is my opinion that your diagram probably applies. /or/ (2b) 'They should have been talking for the last hour.': If your diagram doesn't reflect reality, they need telling off. >> The connection between modals per se and timeframes is usually slight or non-existent. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 15:07 | comment | added | Lambie | No, /I am very sure that the baby was sleeping at that time (2 hours ago), but he woke up 1 hour ago/ is wrong. At the TIME the subject [I] went by the room, the baby was still sleeping, or the baby had not finished sleeping i.e. the baby had not yet woken up. The question to ask re MUST + the PC is: Was the action ongoing at the TIME the utterance was spoken? On your timeline (great timeline by the way), the person creating the utterance is "standing" right at the present division line. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 14:58 | history | edited | Tom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| Jan 30, 2017 at 14:54 | history | asked | Tom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |