View Single Post
  #2 (permalink)  
Unread Feb 13th, 2021, 06:57 am
susan53 susan53 is offline
Sue
 
Join Date: Oct 8th, 2006
Location: Milan
Posts: 1,406
susan53 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Present per./ present per. cont.

The problem lies in the first sentence which should be We are film producers - it's a compound noun with the first noun acting adjectivally, so it can't be plural.

First of all :
  • One use of the present perfect (the one relevant to your example) is to describe events occurring in past to present time.
  • Continuous aspect expresses events which are or were ongoing.

When the event(s) are past and completed (so not on-going), the simple form must be used : We've made 16 films since we graduated from college (= 16 individual completed past events in past to present time - since we graduated from college.)

However, if there is no indication that the action(s) described is/are individual events, then the two concepts (past/present time and ongoing events) can be combined to produce the present perfect continuous - which in this case can be used interchangeably with the simple form. So here :
We've made films since we graduated from college.
= We've been making films since we graduated from college.

The two, in this context, have exactly the same meaning. The only difference is that the second emphasises the on-going concept more than the first.

Here's another example:
I've had a headache three times this week (three separate, individual headaches in past to present time - this week)

But either :
I've had a lot of headaches recently
or:
I've been having a lot of headaches recently
(The headaches are presented as an ongoing problem in past to present time)

Possibly the textbook used only the first structure - the present perfect simple - because the present perfect continuous had not yet been introduced. But the simple form is certainly not wrong.
__________________
An ELT Notebook
The DELTA Course
Reply With Quote