Present Perfect vs. Past Simple

Temat przeniesiony do archwium
Witajcie,
borykam sie z problemem rozroznienia uzycia czasów Present Perfect i Past Simple.
Zastanawiam się czy na przykład jak z kimś rozmawiam, załóżmy że dzwonię z ogłoszenia to powinienem powiedzieć:
I found your advertisment on eBay
czy
I have found your advertisment on eBay

Albo sytuacja kiedy ktoś się wlasnie ''odpowietrzyl'' :D powiemy:
He just farted
czy
He has just farted
?
:)
w obu przypadkach past simple
Dlaczego? Proszę o wyjaśnienie.
Przecież w drugim mam 'just' - które jest słówkiem czasowym dla Present Perefect. a w pierwszym mowie o rzeczy która stała się ale ma zwiazek z terazniejszoscia - dzwonie w sprawie tego ogłoszenia.
edytowany przez dafeq: 14 lut 2018
dla mnie obydwie formy mogą być użyte
a jak to odbierają native speakerzy? Czy jak ktoś zamiesza z Present Perfect i Past Simple to jest to postrzegane jako duzy błąd?

wydaje mi sie ze w American English Past Simple jest bardziej rozpowszechniony w mowie potocznej, mam racje?
problem jest taki, ze wiekszosc osob uczacych sie mowi wlasnie to samo, ze poprzez uzycie perfectu to 'ma zwiazek z terazniejszoscia'; pewnie, ze ma, ale perfect jest do podkreslania tego zwiazku; a tutaj nie ma takiej potrzeby, aby ten zwiazek wyolbrzymiac
dla nativa uzycie perfectu byloby w tym przypadku naduzyciem, nie bledem
1
Czyli rozumiem że jeśli nie ma konkretnego odniesienia do przeszłości dla Past Simple (last week, an hour ago, five minutes ago, last year etc) ani do terazniejszosci dla Present Perfect (this week, this weekend, this year etc) to należy użyć Past Simple? Jeśli powyzsze odniesienia sie pojawią to należy użyć czasu im odpowiadającego?
ogolnie widac, ze masz dobre rozeznanie w temacie, i to sie zgadza, co piszesz
ale pamietaj o jednej rzeczy odnosnie past simple - nawet, jak nie uzyjesz - doslownie - okolicznika czasu, ktory nakazywalby uzycie tego czasu (last wee, two years ago, etc.) to czesciej w swoich myslach masz juz zakodowane, o czym tak naprawde mowisz, czyli o sytuacji z przeszlosci - bo inaczej nie dzwonilbys w sprawie ogloszenia, czy nie poczulbys baka; i to juz wtedy nakreslasz swojemu rozmowcy zdarzenie z przeszlosci, nie uzywajac werbalnie okolicznikow czasu
wierz mi na slowo - perfect sluzy do podkreslania zwiazku przeszlo-terazniejszego czy skutkow wydarzen obracajacych sie na przestrzeni przeszlosci i terazniejszosci, czesto tylko mentalnie (np. ktos komus zarzuca, ze nie ma na co liczyc z panstwowej kasy, choc ten ktos przepracowal kupe lat w zawodzie i oplacal skladki, to powie nawet, jak juz jest na emeryturze: I've worked all my life to at least hope to get something back from the state)
temat rzeka, ale jak sie troche wprawisz to zrozumiesz
2
Cytat:
Przecież w drugim mam 'just' - które jest słówkiem czasowym dla Present Perefect. a w pierwszym mowie o rzeczy która stała się ale ma zwiazek z terazniejszoscia - dzwonie w sprawie tego ogłoszenia.

Tez uwazam, ze za gleboko idziesz w ten zwiazek z terazniejszoscia. Faktem jest ze w BrE to slowko just implikuje Present Perfect, logika zyciowa nie zawsze. Dlatego jesli na egzamin to tak jak w kluczu, jesli w zyciu to na luzie,zrobisz Past i bedzie dobrze. Amerykanie juz maja tak na stale.
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.
dodatkowa uwaga to taka, ze 'just' ma duzo znaczen
Słuszne uwagi :)
w takim razie najlepszym wyjsciem aby to dobrze rozrozniac jest po prostu praktyka, zwracanie uwagi na zdania w past simple/present perfect i konteksty w jakich sie pojawiają choćby w książkach, jakichś artykułach jak i mowie nativów i nie przywiązywanie czasu do ścisłych reguł gramatycznych bo są one tu raczej pomocą niż wyznacznikiem.
edytowany przez dafeq: 15 lut 2018
dokladnie tak
Cytat: dafeq
Witajcie,
borykam sie z problemem rozroznienia uzycia czasów Present Perfect i Past Simple.
Zastanawiam się czy na przykład jak z kimś rozmawiam, załóżmy że dzwonię z ogłoszenia to powinienem powiedzieć:
I found your advertisment on eBay
czy
I have found your advertisment on eBay

Albo sytuacja kiedy ktoś się wlasnie ''odpowietrzyl'' :D powiemy:
He just farted
czy
He has just farted
?
:)

The event you want to mention must be identifiable to the hearer to justify the simple past tense. That means the speaker must assume the hearer will know to which event [rather than what (kind of) event] the speaker refers to: the event must be recognized by the hearer of your talk as part of a specific past situation. The past tense usage is analogous to the definite article in the grammatical domain of nominals.

To add a twist to it, remember this: the present perfect tense is marked in comparison with the past tense. As a result, the simpler and easier to utter tense works just as well when no reference ambiguity can possibly arise.
To read up on markedness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markedness


When someone answered the phone, what did you say after you said "Hi"?
Cytat: dafeq
Przecież w drugim mam 'just' - które jest słówkiem czasowym dla Present Perefect. a w pierwszym mowie o rzeczy która stała się ale ma zwiazek z terazniejszoscia - dzwonie w sprawie tego ogłoszenia.

I have been wondering why this present perfect thing is such a problem to you, and I think I know: your English teacher is clueless about it, and what he doesn't know, he can't teach.

That's what I was (just) wondering about.

See? I could say both: I have (just) been wondering…. and I was (just) wondering…

Try thinking about those tenses outside of any temporal modifiers. What are you going to do if there are no temporals in a planned sentence? Sick one here and there just in case?
edytowany przez Janski: 17 lut 2018
Cytat: chippy
Amerykanie juz maja tak na stale.
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.

No. That's not true.
Cytat: Janski
I think I know: your English teacher is clueless about it, and what he doesn't know, he can't teach.

It's better to have a teacher who doesn't teach something because he doesn't know about it, than to have someone like you who writes incomprehensibly and introduces totally irrelevant terms such as 'nominals' or 'markedness', thus messing with the student's head.

Cytat: Janski
Cytat: chippy
Amerykanie juz maja tak na stale.
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.

No. That's not true.

This works as general guidance and that's what she meant, Mr. know-it-all.
Oh, and by the way:

Cytat: Janski
That means the speaker must assume the hearer will know to which event [rather than what (kind of) event] the speaker refers to

Excessive use of prepositions is a really bad habit.
Cytat:
Cytat: chippy
Amerykanie juz maja tak na stale.
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.

No. That's not true.

Generally it is true. For a student taking TOEFL exam, using PP after "just" in examples such as discussed above, will be considered a mistake. In everyday AmE it's a dominant form also. In extra polite and far fetched situations PP might be used, because like everything else in this life, language has its fluidity.
For the rest of your sophisticated explanation, you are truly convolutedly and astonishingly flabbergasting me :). Reading your explanations on grammar can be quite entertaining, but hardly useful for intermediate level students. If you really want to help, you need to ease out.
Cytat: zielonosiwy
to have someone like you who writes incomprehensibly and introduces totally irrelevant terms such as 'nominals' or 'markedness', thus messing with the student's head.

Janski's introduction of such terms stimulates my curiosity.

Cytat: chippy
Reading your explanations on grammar can be quite entertaining, but hardly useful for intermediate level students.

I find them useful.
edytowany przez labtes: 17 lut 2018
Cytat:
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.
Brits would put ' I've just done it instead of this , I just got used to the fact that AmE does not like Present perfect and it is often being swapped for ' less complex tense ' However , it is plain to see and at times, can be easily comprehended ,regardless the minior differences through here and there. The latter tend to simply matters as much as possible imho...and I'd say this goes on quite like in life , it in fact does not like a complex matters on its way ahead
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 19 lut 2018
Guys,
I have asked my friend who is the British native. Here is what I got:

I asked him what difference he sees between:
I found a map
I have found a map

Cytat:
"Bith mean basically the same thing. That's a very difficult question. If I was asked "what did you find?" or "Did you find anything?" then I would answer "I found a map". If I was asked "what have you found?" or "Have you found anything?" then I would answer "I have found a map".
Usually I would use "I have found a map" with an excuse or a reason I didn't find a map. For example: "I would have found a map but I couldn't see because I lost my glasses"

Then I asked him for opinion about:
"I have studied French for 5 years" vs. "I studied French for 5 years"

and asked him if the first sentence means that I'm still studying and the other one means that I'm finished with my studies. He agreed.

To sum up, the difference is visible but not in all cases and sometimes people use it interchangeably.
If he's still around, try asking him the 'just' question. My bet would be he would accept the Present Perfect sentence only.
Cytat:
I studied French for 5 years"
it perhaps means that the mentioned 5 years might be long time ago ..I studied then ,but I dropped off or whatever , I'm not studying now at the very moment ..it is not established at all when it comes to the refference to the present day , that is the way I see things- I have studied or I've been studying for 5 years ,but sadly i'm still right in the middle of it , and I havent finished this so far- when the period in time is involved - the majority would prefer progressive aspects to convey the plea. whatever the reason is , it seems to be swapped in some cases
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 19 lut 2018
Cytat:
and sometimes people use it interchangeably.
..true , like I mentioned it seems swapped in some cases ,but for majority the plea remains clear for as long as I Am concerned , I bet they'll more or less understand the way of thinking
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 19 lut 2018
Cytat: chippy
Cytat:
Cytat: chippy
Amerykanie juz maja tak na stale.
W AmE powiedza I just did it w kazdym wypadku po just.

No. That's not true.

Generally it is true. For a student taking TOEFL exam, using PP after "just" in examples such as discussed above, will be considered a mistake. In everyday AmE it's a dominant form also. In extra polite and far fetched situations PP might be used, because like everything else in this life, language has its fluidity.
For the rest of your sophisticated explanation, you are truly convolutedly and astonishingly flabbergasting me :). Reading your explanations on grammar can be quite entertaining, but hardly useful for intermediate level students. If you really want to help, you need to ease out.

I am easing up.
Your generally (formerly always) means crap.
I don't think that for a student who takes a TOEFL and uses the present perfect tense after just instead of the preterite would be a mistake as long as the event time is not made definite in the same sentence.
If you misspoke, correct your post and say " I am sorry, I misspoke."

Second, people are not convoluted. Concepts and ideas are.

Third, your English isn't intermediate level yet.

Fourth, I'll have you know that in AmE I have just done it there is an underlying hint of accomplishment, often in retrospect, and only apparently contrary to the immediacy of just.
Cytat: Janski
Fourth, I'll have you know that in AmE I have just done it there is an underlying hint of accomplishment, often in retrospect, and only apparently contrary to the immediacy of just.

I've just reread my post (present perfect) and I feel I should have added an additional comment about this present perfect-vs-preterite question, which is that being proud of one's accomplishment is not something that an AmE speaker feels he must convey in everyday conversation.
That's just my opinion.
Cytat: labtes
I find them useful.

Thanks.
so everything depends on context; let's take these two examples below:

-Will Brian participate in next week's conference?
- I don't think so. He has broken his leg.
or: Brain hasn't been able to participate in any conference since he broke his leg.

but:
Brian had a bad accident and broke his leg in several places. (no reference to present)

I wonder whether you agree ?
Cytat:
I don't think that for a student who takes a TOEFL and uses the present perfect tense after just instead of the preterite would be a mistake as long as the event time is not made definite in the same sentence.

Then you are not familiar with that test.
Cytat:
If you misspoke, correct your post and say

I don't think I did.
Cytat:
Third, your English isn't intermediate level yet.

You are no one to judge but suit yourself.
Cytat:
people are not convoluted

Applied to the concept and meant as a joke. Read it more closely.

You throw in a lot of academic theory, ask yourself if that is always useful for the inquirer.

Cytat:
Your generally (formerly always) means crap.

It was nice talking to you too. Have a good one.
Cytat:
wydaje mi sie ze w American English Past Simple jest bardziej rozpowszechniony w mowie potocznej, mam racje?

Nie do konca. PP normalnie uzywany jest w zdaniach z since and for jakkolwiek w tych z just, already i yet dominujaca forma bedzie z Past . Zerknij na ten link:

The biggest difference between American and British English is in the vocabulary, but this is one of the grammatical differences between the two.

https://www.myhappyenglish.com/free-english-lesson/2014/03/10/simple-past-vs-present-perfect-american-vs-british-english-grammar-lesson/
Temat przeniesiony do archwium