Given that this has appeared around Easter (albeit a couple of days early in my calendar), I'm going to answer on the basis of the phrase
Christ is risen! He is risen indeed, alleluia!
which is used in some traditions.
There are two ways of looking at this.
It's an archaic use of English which conjugates verbs of motion with be in present perfect, in ...
Affirming Andrew Leach's answer, the Paschal Greeting can be classified as a set phrase in many languages--especially those influenced by Orthodox Christianity.
He is risen is perceived in modern English as a predicate adjective, but it is technically an archaic present perfect construction from Matthew 28:6:
He is not here: for he is risen, as he said....
1 means that the action happened just now. You would typically see it in your e-mail program just after you send an e-mail. Your program might give you this message to let you know that the message you just sent has indeed been sent.
2 refers to something that happened at some time in the past. It could have been an hour ago, a day ago, or even a century ...
The difference between your two examples isn’t great, but, depending on context, A might give a slightly stronger impression than B that the speaker will continue to live there.
The difference is more apparent in a pair such as:
I’ve been reading your book.
I’ve read your book.
The first suggests that the speaker is still reading it, whereas the ...
Think of the past tense as referring to an event that took place at a particular time in the past. In saying The message was sent, the speaker will normally have in mind something like yesterday or last week.
The present perfect is called 'present' for a reason. The speaker is talking about the situation now, a situation in which a past event has some ...
... you can't present perfect (or continuous) and past simple within a sentence.
As it stands, this rule is incorrect. In many cases it is acceptable and logical to mix past and present references in consecutive clauses
I lost my keys last week, but now I have found them.
This makes sense: A was true then, but B is true now.
This, however, ...
The ever in questions such as Have you ever flown a kite? can be understood as in your life to this present moment. The present perfect (have/has + past participle) is used because in your life is conceived of as unfinished time.
It is the reason why the present perfect is used with other expressions that imply unfinished time:
Have you seen Mary today?
It wouldn't be wrong to say "Did you go to French Class today?", nor would it make you look stupid. Your friend is wrong though. There is nothing old-fashioned about using a perfect tense where a perfect tense is needed.
In your example, it would depend on the circumstances. "Did you go to French class today?" is seeking information and nothing more. "Have ...
The main verb is are -- the Present Tense Third Person Plural form of be.
This is another reduced relative clause, with Whiz-Deletion operating, this time on the be of the Passive, rather than the be of the Progressive, like the question this morning. The original sentence was something like
There are several reasons which/that are/were proposed for the ...
Both are possible, grammatical, and idiomatic, but "my email ID has changed" simply means that the ID is no longer the same, while "my email ID has been changed" puts more stress on the fact that someone is responsible for actively changing the ID.
We can use 'could have' to talk about something somebody was capable of doing in PAST but didn't do. (Possible in Past)
I could have gone to Oxford University but I preferred Harvard.
She could have married him but she didn't want to.
They could have bought a house here 20 years ago but chose not to.
We can use 'could have been' to talk about possible ...
Since 1973, the festival has been running every year.
Since 1973, the festival has been run by the town's entertainment committee.
Both fragments that you wrote are incomplete, but not incorrect, and they can be completed in different ways. In "has been run", "run" is a passive form: (Active) The town's entertainment committee runs the festival. (Passive) ...
The rule you quote is simplistic. It is quite permissible to mix all sorts of tenses within one sentence. The issue is whether the time relationships that they convey make sense.
Take a simpler case: present and future. Would a blanket rule that you should never mix present and future in a sentence be valid? No. "Bob owns the house and so he will paint it ...
“Have you done it?” is the question to ask if you want to know:
whether a task is finished, or
whether they have experience with some task.
For example, if you want to know whether a report is done, or whether somebody has gone sky diving before, you can ask, “Have you done it?” In the first case, you could also ask, “Have you done it yet?” In the latter, ...
"It will be the first time I have flown to America." - the flight will have finished at the point in time you're talking about: "It will be the first time [that] I [will] have flown to America". The first part of the clause indicates a future time, the subclause "i have flown to America" is in future perfect, indicating a completed future event.
"It will be ...
The phrase needed quotation marks
It was "been there, done that"
This is indeed said when someone claims an event or deed (e.g. landing on the moon) has already been performed
been there done that
an assertion that the speaker has personal experience or knowledge of a particular place or topic quotations
B: Been there, done ...
In "I've been waiting for you for seven years" the focus is on the act of waiting. Maybe you want to emphasise how long seven years is, or make the listener understand how patient you have been.
In "I've waited for you for seven years" the focus is on the result of the wait. Now, perhaps you want to emphasis that the wait is over, or you are unwilling to ...
when you say “I wrote my article yesterday,” does this imply that at this moment you have a finished article or not?
Yes, you finished it. Otherwise, as you say, you would say something like "I started to write my article yesterday". In that case, 'started to write' has finished even if the article hasn't.
What about present perfect? Does it imply ...
Let's look at a little more context:
When the night has come and the land is dark
And the moon is the only light we see
No, I won't be afraid, oh, I won't be afraid
Just as long as you stand, stand by me
A perfect construction marks a past action as having brought about a state which is relevant at some later point: the utterance’s ‘Reference ...
Speaking as a non-linguist with no education in the theory, but a native speaker with a lifetime of exposure to practice, my ear would expect you to say "The most important news is that my parents opened a new restaurant a few weeks ago."
If you said "have opened a restaurant a few weeks ago", it would sound really off. Additionally, "opened" implies "new"...
The Perfect construction is far more common than the construction you want to use, so you're headed up the garden path for sure without changes.
To inhibit interpretation as Perfect, just include something that can't appear between auxiliary have and a Perfect participle, but can appear between a main verb have in the 'possess' sense and its direct object.
Your example as presented is certainly grammatical and there is no need on grounds of grammar alone to remove been. It is a present perfect passive construction formed by the present tense of have + the past participle of be (been) + the past participle of the main verb (concluded). Conclude is used here with the general sense of bringing a transaction to an ...
It's already noted in another question that to be was used to form the perfect aspect, being replaced by to have in this role, but gradually so that to be was used of verbs of motion, to indicate the state arrived at (to have coming into this axillary role in Old English, and established into it in early Middle English, but to be still not entirely replaced ...
The following sentences have two distinct but related tenses. Though people may be tempted to say the sentence with having is the continuous one, they'd be mistaken. In fact, they're both in a continuous tense!
I have been having classes for three months.
I have had classes for three months.
So how do they differ? Let's illustrate with their non-...
I have not sent two invitations yet.
I have not sent two invitations so far.
The major difference is that yet is a Negative Polarity Item (NPI), while so far isn't.
The way you demonstrate that is to remove the not from both sentences:
I have sent two invitations so far
is still grammatical, but
*I have sent two invitations yet
isn't grammatical (...
(1) Epistemic can
Linguists often distinguish between three types of modality: Dynamic modality is about ability, capacity, physics. Deontic modality is about permission, obligation, social rules. Epistemic modality is about possibility, necessity, knowledge.
The auxiliary can normally carries dynamic and deontic modality.
(1) Mary can swim → ‘Mary ...
"I have come to notice [something]"
...normally emphasises the progressive nature of the action (i.e. - it didn't happen instantaneously). Per JeffSahol's comment below, in some circumstances it may imply the action was overdue (should have happened earlier), rather than that it actually took place over an extended period.
Although it's present ...