0

Is there any difference between these two

1 I will have been teaching for 20 years this summer

2 I will have taught for 20 years this summer

3 By the time you come back I will have been reading this book for 3 hours

3 By the time you come back I will have read this book for 3 hours

My question is if future perfect continuous is possible can I always replace it with future perfect simple?

Bob
  • 59
  • 5

1 Answers1

1

It sounds like you understand there is no real difference in meaning between examples 1 & 2 - 'have been teaching' and 'have taught' - and you'd be correct. These are both idiomatic ways to talk about the work of a teacher.

Technically, the difference between 3 & 4 is the same and I agree they seem comparable to examples 1 & 2 - yet example 4 does sound slightly off to a native British speaker. As I said, "I have taught" is an idiomatic way of saying you have 'worked as a teacher'. It carries a recognised meaning that does not apply to other job roles based on verbs - for example, engineers do not say "I have engineered for 20 years", nor do firefighters say "I have fire-fought for 20 years". So, what is correct and natural in examples 1 & 2 doesn't automatically carry over to other verbs and contexts.

In the example of the reading, "have been reading for 3 hours" nicely conveys that you have been continuously engaged in reading for that length of time. The word "read" by itself (ie "I will have read for 3 hours") sounds okay, too. But "read this book for 3 hours" doesn't sound natural in this context. The past participle doesn't seem to convey the meaning that you have been engaged in reading until the time was up.

Astralbee
  • 100,700
  • 2
  • 111
  • 222
  • Thank you...hhh – Bob Mar 01 '24 at 13:55
  • There is a small difference between them but sometimes using simple may be akward. Therfore it's best to stick to continuous with examples like the ones I provided. Yes? – Bob Mar 01 '24 at 14:29
  • "It carries a recognised meaning that does not apply to other job roles based on verbs - for example, engineers do not say "I have engineered for 20 years", nor do firefighters say "I have fire-fought for 20 years". So, what is correct and natural in examples 1 & 2 doesn't automatically carry over to other verbs and contexts." Is it only like that with future perfect simple or it works the same way with other tenses and for example using present perfect and saying "I have engineered for 10 years" is fine or no? – Bob Mar 01 '24 at 15:17
  • No, it isn't 'fine'. The point being made is that teach can be used to mean work as a teacher, but in most cases you can't derive a verb from the name of an occupation like that. – Kate Bunting Mar 01 '24 at 16:17