0

What is the difference between these two sentences:

The first feature-length comedy film was created by Charlie Chaplin.
The first feature-length comedy film has been created by Charlie Chaplin.

and the followings are also seems very similar:

By the time you read this, I will be arrested for murder.
By the time you read this, I will have been arrested for murder.

ColleenV
  • 11,971
  • 13
  • 47
  • 85
vho
  • 879
  • 11
  • 33
  • 44
  • 5
    Each of your second sentences utilizes the perfect: the first is in the past perfect, and the second in the future perfect. The perfect means that an action is completed (or "perfected.") A good rule is ”Don’t use the perfect unless you need it.” Read this link to learn about the perfect. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 19:45
  • 1
    Am I wrong in thinking that "had been" is past perfect and "has been" is present perfect, with a sense of recent completion? – djna Aug 10 '16 at 19:59
  • Also I don't think "By the time you read this, I will be arrested for murder." is quite right, the perfect form seems much better here. – djna Aug 10 '16 at 20:01
  • What @P. E. Dant said. Your second example would at the very least be considered "strange" by native speakers. Chaplin has been dead for decades, so it's hard to see how the normal connotations of "Present Perfect implies relevance to time of utterance" would apply (besides which I doubt anyone referred to [video] files** during his lifetime; certainly he wouldn't have). This is what happens if you try to use complex verb forms when there's no need. – FumbleFingers Aug 10 '16 at 20:24
  • By the time you read this, I will have been arrested for murder. – Lambie Aug 10 '16 at 20:46
  • @P.E.Dant It's not my rule, it's Fumble's: I call it FumbleFingers' Perfect Truism. – StoneyB on hiatus Aug 10 '16 at 22:39
  • @djna You're correct, of course. It's present perfect, not past, which would be "had been created." FumbleFingers' Perfect Truism still applies, though. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 22:40
  • @StoneyB Brain cramp. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 22:42

1 Answers1

-1

Think of an action as having a starting point and an end point in terms of time reference. Simple past indicates that the action was completed. Both end points are in the past. Present Perfect just says that the starting point is in the past while the end point is not clear, or of no importance, just that the action took place in the past.

I was in Paris last year -- very specific, and emphasizes that the event has ended.

I have been to Paris -- was there some time in the past (possibly many times, possibly again in the future), and thus know what you are talking about when you are talking about Paris.

I thought the earth was square (no longer think) I have thought the earth was square (possibly still think). Whether the action has ended is not important to convey.

http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/presentperfect.html

Ryan Phan
  • 9
  • 1
  • Past imperfect? I don't think there's any such thing in English. – FumbleFingers Aug 10 '16 at 20:26
  • @FumbleFingers "I never hadn't been to Paris," perhaps? – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 20:38
  • @P. E. Dant: I had been to Paris is Past Perfect, and I kinda doubt the additional negations (*never* and *n't = not) would affect the name of the tense. Googling past imperfect in english* suggests there is such a thing in, for example, French and Spanish, but I'd need to see something more authoritative before accepting that it exists in English. I'm also deeply suspicious of Ryan's I have thought the earth was square for almost any context (though I do accept you could "legimitise" it to some extent by continuing the sentence with, say, ...all my life). – FumbleFingers Aug 10 '16 at 20:46
  • If this were usenet, I'd have appended "j/k." Mr Phan's usage is clearly a typo, anyway, isn't it? – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 20:48
  • Sorry guys, my bad. I never pay attention to the nomenclature too much. Anyway, fixed to Present Perfect – Ryan Phan Aug 10 '16 at 20:54
  • @RyanPhan At a site like ELL, that nomenclature is worthy of attention! In this case, a Spanish speaker (for instance) might be confused, because there is a past imperfect in Spanish. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 21:02
  • @FumbleFingers Look at what I stumbled upon! He makes an interesting case, but it's not a tense in any meaningful way, it seems to me, and more of workaround to compensate for English's lack of a true past imperfect inflection. It boils down to combine the past progressive form of the main verb with the past tense forms of the verb “be.” – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 21:08
  • @RyanPhan By the way, many people prefer the term present continuous or present progressive to avoid confusing speakers of Latinate languages which really do have an imperfect. English doesn't have a true imparfait as a discrete verb form as French, for instance, does. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 21:18
  • @Ryan: Ahem... You "fixed" it by switching to Present Imperfect, but that doesn't exist in English either! Reluctantly, my downvote still stands. – FumbleFingers Aug 10 '16 at 21:24
  • @P. E. Dant: Interesting case, but I'm not convinced the guy really knows what he's talking about anyway. He says “We were working on an urgent project” would be meaningful only in the context of being an answer to a previously asked question like, say, “What were you doing when the fire broke out past midnight?” Putting aside the fact that "past midnight" sounds really weird there, I can't see any reason why an autobiography, say, couldn't start with I was working in a factory when I first realised I really wanted to be a lumberjack. No need for some weird question to set context there. – FumbleFingers Aug 10 '16 at 21:33
  • @FumbleFingers To be fair, I do see present imperfect used here and there in place of progressive/continuous. Also see Wiktionary. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 21:36
  • @FumbleFingers I agree on Mr Carillo. He's trying to explain to Spanish-speaking Filipinos, whose language really does inflect the tense, how we express the past imperfect in English. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 21:38
  • I think you're right @FumbleFingers, there's no any such thing in English. This is a matter of aspect specifically, the difference between “perfective” and “imperfective” aspect. – Lucian Sava Aug 10 '16 at 22:41
  • @LucianSava Exactly. Because English does not inflect the imperfect, it's important to avoid confusing Spanish (and all Latinate) speakers by referring to the present continuous in English as present imperfect. – P. E. Dant Reinstate Monica Aug 10 '16 at 22:46