1

I've heard that you can't use the present perfect to talk about something which is not possible anymore. In this case, since the World Trade Center no longer exists and you can't visit there anymore, the sentence should be "I went to the World Trade Center." That's what I heard. Is that correct?

5
  • 1
    There's no "rule".
    – Hot Licks
    Apr 28, 2020 at 13:06
  • Can you remember where you heard or read this?
    – Conrado
    Apr 28, 2020 at 14:24
  • There's certainly a "rule of thumb" that we use present perfect to describe an event that occurred in the past and is continuing into the present, which is probably why at least some of us might find OP's example here slightly "odd". It's perhaps worth noting Hamlet's Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath borne me on his back a thousand times - where arguably that Perfect form lends "immediacy / relevance to time of utterance" to his words. Apr 28, 2020 at 15:31
  • There's nothing wrong with I've been to the World Trade Center at least once in the past 30 years. It's still fine without that qualification. In fact, it's very much the syntax used on certain types of true or false game shows. Apr 28, 2020 at 21:15
  • since the World Trade Center no longer exists the sentence should be either: 1."I went to the World Trade Center before 2001/it was destroyed." or 2. "I went/have been to the site of World Trade Center."
    – Greybeard
    Apr 29, 2020 at 8:10

1 Answer 1

-1

"I've", which is the abbreviation of "I have", is correct.

1
  • 1
    Please can you provide the reason behind your answer? What makes it correct? Apr 29, 2020 at 7:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.