小弟做緊英文功課，有d現在完成式問題想問下
在2014年10月3日A公司在八點半成立，B公司在十點半成立，宜家我講"B and A Companies has been established." 有無問題。
詢問present perfect tense 問題
2014-10-23 3:27 pm
回答 (4)
2014-10-23 6:37 pm
✔ 最佳答案
用perfect tense (無論是present或是past的perfect tense)都要注意它是表達相對時間性的剛剛/剛才發生的事。這兩間公司在月初成立...今天(10月23日)怎樣講/寫也不會用perfect tense講它們的成立時間，更何況你的句子連日期也欠奉，做句結構就是不完整意義。你要先考慮句子要表達的內容，然後選用合商的詞彙和時態文法來表達。
要講這兩間公司"已經"成立了
Company A and Company B was establish earlier this month.
注意英文寫一間公司可以有兩種寫法:
abc company或company abc
前者是公司的註冊名稱，後者是你只知那公司叫abc而company是表示abc這名字是指一間公司名。
A Company has been established.只是一句無意義的句子，因為如上說用perfect tense是想講出事件的相對時間性跟某些事的關係，單單這句而沒有相應的另一件事的關係，就算事件的事實是這公司是在今天上午成立你這句也是差的句子...最少也要加上A Company has been established this morning...。
2014-10-24 5:17 pm
Present perfect tense denotes present results of past actions. Note that the words: for and since are used.Applying "since" when we refer to a point of time in the past. Applying "for" when we refer to a period of time.
Company A has been established.
Company B has been established.
Company A has been established since 8:30 am on Oct.3,2014.
Company B has been established since 10:30 am on Oct.3,2014 for a period of time of (10:30-8:30=02:00) hrs.later.
Hence:-B&A Companies have been established for a difference of 2 hrs. come between A&B in period of time.(Sentence okay !)
established=to start an organization etc. that is meant to last for a long time.
Company A has been established.
Company B has been established.
Company A has been established since 8:30 am on Oct.3,2014.
Company B has been established since 10:30 am on Oct.3,2014 for a period of time of (10:30-8:30=02:00) hrs.later.
Hence:-B&A Companies have been established for a difference of 2 hrs. come between A&B in period of time.(Sentence okay !)
established=to start an organization etc. that is meant to last for a long time.
2014-10-24 9:34 am
"Company A and Company B was establish earlier this month." ~ 這句子是錯
首先:
establish 是 verb in the base form, 不是 adjective, 應該用 established (past participle)
其次
Company A and Company B 是 compound subject
compound subject 是用 plural verb, 不是用 was, 是用 were
2014-10-24 02:14:07 補充：
To "Be Patient"
你說這句 "B and A Companies has been established." 無問題
我認為大有問題
Companies 是 plural, 怎會用 has?
"has been established." 是 present perfect, in passive voice
怎會變出 past perfect?
假設 singular subject, 無其他 adverb, or adverbial phrase/clause
不會用 present./psst perfect
2014-10-24 07:54:00 補充：
Jenkin 說得對
Company A has been established. ~ 是無意義
"Company A" 是 singular subject, 這句無其他 adverbial
公司成立了 20 天, 不用 present perfect
相反地, Company A has not been established. ~ OK
Company A 直到現在未成立
2014-10-24 09:02:56 補充：
When we arrived at the station, the bus had left.
I had to study hard in the library yesterday afternoon because I failed my last test.
He was born in Africa and he didn't go to school until he was ten.
不寫 "He had been born in Africa ..... "
當兩事件發生, 時間上順理 in sequence, 先發生的事不用 past perfect
2014-10-25 00:38:43 補充：
To TOMING88:
I’m afraid that you still keep on committing a series of blunders on "tense".
“B&A Companies have been established for a difference of 2 hrs.” ~ WRONG
希望其他的人改正, I talk too much.
首先:
establish 是 verb in the base form, 不是 adjective, 應該用 established (past participle)
其次
Company A and Company B 是 compound subject
compound subject 是用 plural verb, 不是用 was, 是用 were
2014-10-24 02:14:07 補充：
To "Be Patient"
你說這句 "B and A Companies has been established." 無問題
我認為大有問題
Companies 是 plural, 怎會用 has?
"has been established." 是 present perfect, in passive voice
怎會變出 past perfect?
假設 singular subject, 無其他 adverb, or adverbial phrase/clause
不會用 present./psst perfect
2014-10-24 07:54:00 補充：
Jenkin 說得對
Company A has been established. ~ 是無意義
"Company A" 是 singular subject, 這句無其他 adverbial
公司成立了 20 天, 不用 present perfect
相反地, Company A has not been established. ~ OK
Company A 直到現在未成立
2014-10-24 09:02:56 補充：
When we arrived at the station, the bus had left.
I had to study hard in the library yesterday afternoon because I failed my last test.
He was born in Africa and he didn't go to school until he was ten.
不寫 "He had been born in Africa ..... "
當兩事件發生, 時間上順理 in sequence, 先發生的事不用 past perfect
2014-10-25 00:38:43 補充：
To TOMING88:
I’m afraid that you still keep on committing a series of blunders on "tense".
“B&A Companies have been established for a difference of 2 hrs.” ~ WRONG
希望其他的人改正, I talk too much.
2014-10-24 1:14 am
無問題!You are right!You can see the past prefect tense and know more about this tense!
Past Perfect Tense （過去完成式）
當我們想表達一個比 Simple Past Tense 更早發生的動作時，就會用上 Past Perfect Tense 或 Past Perfect Continuous Tense，現在先說 Past Perfect Tense。
這個 Past Perfect Tense 與 Present Perfect Tense 雖然名字很相似，但是用法卻有一點兒不同。Past Perfect Tense 不需要像 Present Perfect Tense 般注意什麼 "有沒有準確時間"，只要在相比下較 Simple Past Tense 早，便可以交給它去辦了。
E.g.：We were there at 9:00 a.m., but the bus had gone.
E.g.：I studied hard in library yesterday afternoon, because I had got a very bad result. If I don't work hard now, I will fail again.
為了加深概念，我們再看多兩個例子吧：
E.g.：He had left ten minutes ago.
E.g.：He left ten minutes ago.
這兩個例子，其中一個是錯誤的，你知道是哪個嗎？如果單從中文翻譯："他十分鐘前已經走了"，好像是第一句比較正確，十分鐘前嘛！你認為呢？
其實我這般地問，答案當然不是啦～
這是一個對 Tenses 不熟識的考生常犯的錯誤，如果你對 Tenses 已經很有信心，請耐心地再聽多次吧，因為我喜歡 "有殺錯，冇放過…"。還記得之前我們說過，Past Perfect Tense 是一個動作比 Simple Past Tense 還要早時便可用得著嗎？因此如果要用 Past Perfect Tense，先決條件就是要有比較，那麼你應該有一個問題了：從上面的例子中，不是已經有了比較嗎？"十分鐘" 嘛！…
但其實這比較並不是 Verb to Noun, Verb to Preposition…etc（i.e. 不是與詞意相比），而是與 動詞 相比。再再再再簡單點來說，就是用 Past Perfect 之前，必須有一個 Simple Past Tense 作為其比較對象。
相反地，如果我們 "包咬頸"，一定要用 "Ten minutes ago" 作比較！那麼問題便會發生了。因為單單一個時間副詞："Ago, Before…etc"並不代表比某個時間前，反之，從以上例子中，我們應該把整件事視為一個 Simple Past Tense。因 "Ten minutes ago" 是過去了，"Twenty minutes ago" 又是過去了，在沒有 動詞 比較之下，又怎能斷定是不是比 Simple Past Tense 早呢？想一想是不是？所以並不需要畫蛇添足。
好了，一些基本理論講完之後，便來一點用法上面要注意的地方吧。
1. 當一個動作於另一個動作後 "隨即發生"，我們就會兩個動作都同時用 Simple Past Tense，以表達它們迫切性。不過，這一個用法一般都較少人會注意。
E.g.：When the thief saw the policeman, he ran away.
2. 當一句 clause 以 "Before, After, Until…etc" 這些 Conjunction（連接詞）作開頭時，我們就可以用 Past Perfect Tense 或 Simple Past Tense，隨你喜歡。
E.g.：After she took/had taken a shower, she started to do her homework.
Past Perfect Tense （過去完成式）
當我們想表達一個比 Simple Past Tense 更早發生的動作時，就會用上 Past Perfect Tense 或 Past Perfect Continuous Tense，現在先說 Past Perfect Tense。
這個 Past Perfect Tense 與 Present Perfect Tense 雖然名字很相似，但是用法卻有一點兒不同。Past Perfect Tense 不需要像 Present Perfect Tense 般注意什麼 "有沒有準確時間"，只要在相比下較 Simple Past Tense 早，便可以交給它去辦了。
E.g.：We were there at 9:00 a.m., but the bus had gone.
E.g.：I studied hard in library yesterday afternoon, because I had got a very bad result. If I don't work hard now, I will fail again.
為了加深概念，我們再看多兩個例子吧：
E.g.：He had left ten minutes ago.
E.g.：He left ten minutes ago.
這兩個例子，其中一個是錯誤的，你知道是哪個嗎？如果單從中文翻譯："他十分鐘前已經走了"，好像是第一句比較正確，十分鐘前嘛！你認為呢？
其實我這般地問，答案當然不是啦～
這是一個對 Tenses 不熟識的考生常犯的錯誤，如果你對 Tenses 已經很有信心，請耐心地再聽多次吧，因為我喜歡 "有殺錯，冇放過…"。還記得之前我們說過，Past Perfect Tense 是一個動作比 Simple Past Tense 還要早時便可用得著嗎？因此如果要用 Past Perfect Tense，先決條件就是要有比較，那麼你應該有一個問題了：從上面的例子中，不是已經有了比較嗎？"十分鐘" 嘛！…
但其實這比較並不是 Verb to Noun, Verb to Preposition…etc（i.e. 不是與詞意相比），而是與 動詞 相比。再再再再簡單點來說，就是用 Past Perfect 之前，必須有一個 Simple Past Tense 作為其比較對象。
相反地，如果我們 "包咬頸"，一定要用 "Ten minutes ago" 作比較！那麼問題便會發生了。因為單單一個時間副詞："Ago, Before…etc"並不代表比某個時間前，反之，從以上例子中，我們應該把整件事視為一個 Simple Past Tense。因 "Ten minutes ago" 是過去了，"Twenty minutes ago" 又是過去了，在沒有 動詞 比較之下，又怎能斷定是不是比 Simple Past Tense 早呢？想一想是不是？所以並不需要畫蛇添足。
好了，一些基本理論講完之後，便來一點用法上面要注意的地方吧。
1. 當一個動作於另一個動作後 "隨即發生"，我們就會兩個動作都同時用 Simple Past Tense，以表達它們迫切性。不過，這一個用法一般都較少人會注意。
E.g.：When the thief saw the policeman, he ran away.
2. 當一句 clause 以 "Before, After, Until…etc" 這些 Conjunction（連接詞）作開頭時，我們就可以用 Past Perfect Tense 或 Simple Past Tense，隨你喜歡。
E.g.：After she took/had taken a shower, she started to do her homework.
收錄日期: 2021-04-11 20:54:09
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20141023000051KK00014