|
Author |
Message |
|
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 958
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 38
Kudos [?]:
559
[0], given: 40
|
Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
 24 May 2010, 00:32
Hi, I have some doubts on the usage of HAVE BEEN: 1. The recent amendments to the rules governing professional baseball, like those governing professional gymnastics, were motivated by a desire to make the sport more interesting to watch. A) B) those to the rules governing professional gymnastics, were motivated C) those to the rules which govern professional gymnastics, were motivated D) the amendments to the rules governing professional gymnastics, have been motivated E) the amendments governing professional gymnastics, were being motivated OA is B. When I googled this, I found that: Here in D, HAVE BEEN indicates that the amendments are still happening. So, D is incorrect. 2. Scientists are currently trying to determine the extent to which tectonic plates have been shifted from their previous positions by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. A. to which tectonic plates have been shifted B. to which tectonic plates have shifted C. of the shift of tectonic plates D. of tectonic plate shifting E. that tectonic plates have been shifted OA is A. I am confused why different answers for same usage and same passive strutures. Please explain. Source - Kaplan.
_________________
Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 572
Location: Cambridge, MA
Followers: 52
Kudos [?]:
130
[1] , given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
24 May 2010, 13:59
1
This post received
KUDOS
Hi ykaiim, In the first problem, 'have been' isn't a matter of continuing vs. not continuing; it's a matter of specified time versus unspecified time. In the first sentence, we are given a time cue to when they were motivated: the change was "recent," at the time of the amendments. Because we know when the even happens, even if not the exact time, the simple past is correct In the second, we have no time cues whatsoever; we don't know if the earthquakes happened yesterday or 100 million years ago. When an English sentences discusses events in the past without specifying the time frame, the present perfect 'have/has [participle]' tense is correct.
_________________
Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!
Kaplan Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 958
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 38
Kudos [?]:
559
[0], given: 40
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
25 May 2010, 04:53
Thanks Eli, This (2) is new funda to me. Can you please provide some more examples for (2) case? KapTeacherEli wrote: Hi ykaiim,
In the first problem, 'have been' isn't a matter of continuing vs. not continuing; it's a matter of specified time versus unspecified time. In the first sentence, we are given a time cue to when they were motivated: the change was "recent," at the time of the amendments. Because we know when the even happens, even if not the exact time, the simple past is correct
In the second, we have no time cues whatsoever; we don't know if the earthquakes happened yesterday or 100 million years ago. When an English sentences discusses events in the past without specifying the time frame, the present perfect 'have/has [participle]' tense is correct.
_________________
Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 572
Location: Cambridge, MA
Followers: 52
Kudos [?]:
130
[4] , given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
25 May 2010, 07:42
4
This post received
KUDOS
I have had three bikes. I had one when I was twelve. Billy has already eaten. He ate lunch this afternoon. Our nation has had a number of crisis points threatening its existence. The first was the Civil War. In each of the first sentences, we have no time cues; the sentence gives no indication when Billy ate lunch, I owned a bike, or the nation faced a crisis. Thus, we use the present perfect. In each of the second sentences, we have a time cue: 'twelve,' 'this afternoon', 'the Civil War'. Thus, we use the simple past.
_________________
Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!
Kaplan Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 995
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
280
[1] , given: 36
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
12 Jun 2010, 10:26
1
This post received
KUDOS
hey Eli Sorry to butt in. I found this topic interesting. In the second, "have shifted" ---> changes the meaning of the sentence. tectonic plates have been shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> means that plates do not shift on their own. They were shifted by earthquakes. tectonic plates have shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> This is illogical. How can plates shift on their own? I may be wrong, but I think that's a fair difference between the two expressions. KapTeacherEli wrote: Hi ykaiim,
In the first problem, 'have been' isn't a matter of continuing vs. not continuing; it's a matter of specified time versus unspecified time. In the first sentence, we are given a time cue to when they were motivated: the change was "recent," at the time of the amendments. Because we know when the even happens, even if not the exact time, the simple past is correct
In the second, we have no time cues whatsoever; we don't know if the earthquakes happened yesterday or 100 million years ago. When an English sentences discusses events in the past without specifying the time frame, the present perfect 'have/has [participle]' tense is correct.
_________________
Please press kudos if you like my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 572
Location: Cambridge, MA
Followers: 52
Kudos [?]:
130
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
12 Jun 2010, 21:43
nusmavrik wrote: hey Eli
Sorry to butt in. I found this topic interesting. In the second, "have shifted" ---> changes the meaning of the sentence.
tectonic plates have been shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> means that plates do not shift on their own. They were shifted by earthquakes.
tectonic plates have shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> This is illogical. How can plates shift on their own?
I may be wrong, but I think that's a fair difference between the two expressions. Hi nusmavrik, You're absolutely correct that the 'have been shifted by' and 'have shifted' are different tenses. However, this has nothing to do with the present perfect. In both cases, the 'have' correctly indicates an event that happens in the past, but whose time frame is unspecified. The difference between the other two is the difference between the active voice (plates shifted) and the passive (plates were shifted). This is a key, but independent, grammar concept.
_________________
Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!
Kaplan Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 995
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
280
[0], given: 36
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
12 Jun 2010, 23:59
hey Eli Since we are talking about "present perfect", I will like to know why is "having been" almost always wrong on gmat. Am I making a wrong assumption? Thanks mavrik KapTeacherEli wrote: nusmavrik wrote: hey Eli
Sorry to butt in. I found this topic interesting. In the second, "have shifted" ---> changes the meaning of the sentence.
tectonic plates have been shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> means that plates do not shift on their own. They were shifted by earthquakes.
tectonic plates have shifted by earthquakes and other similar phenomena. ---> This is illogical. How can plates shift on their own?
I may be wrong, but I think that's a fair difference between the two expressions. Hi nusmavrik, You're absolutely correct that the 'have been shifted by' and 'have shifted' are different tenses. However, this has nothing to do with the present perfect. In both cases, the 'have' correctly indicates an event that happens in the past, but whose time frame is unspecified. The difference between the other two is the difference between the active voice (plates shifted) and the passive (plates were shifted). This is a key, but independent, grammar concept. _________________
Please press kudos if you like my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 67
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
16 Jun 2010, 02:07
having is progressive and been is progressive, they cant be used together
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 67
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
16 Jun 2010, 02:16
421. In theory, international civil servants at the United Nations are prohibited from continuing to draw salaries from their own governments; in practice, however, some governments merely substitute living allowances for their employees’ paychecks, assigned by them to the United Nations.
(A) for their employees’ paychecks, assigned by them
(B) for the paychecks of their employees who have been assigned
(C) for the paychecks of their employees, having been assigned
(D) in place of their employees’ paychecks, for those of them assigned
(E) in place of the paychecks of their employees to have been assigned by them
the answer is clearly B. but can u explain me y 'have been' is used here?
Last edited by roshanaslam on 16 Jun 2010, 02:46, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 572
Location: Cambridge, MA
Followers: 52
Kudos [?]:
130
[3] , given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
16 Jun 2010, 23:52
3
This post received
KUDOS
ONce again, it's the passive voice; the base verb is "were assigned by the UN", a sentence in which the subject is employees but the actor is the UN, which makes the assignments. The 'have' tense indicates the time frame (unspecified past), and since we are now using the perfect tense, 'were' becomes the participle 'been'.
_________________
Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!
Kaplan Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 67
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
17 Jun 2010, 02:54
thanks a lot
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 70
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 14
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
10 Jul 2011, 01:33
Dear Eli, kudos to you for demystifying perfect tense.  In the following sentence, the usage of "have been having" is correct as per a grammar site (englishpage). Matt and Sarah have been having some difficulties in their relationship lately, so they have been going to a marriage counselor. I hope they work everything out. but it is also given that: REMEMBER Non-Continuous Verbs/ Mixed Verbs It is important to remember that Non-Continuous Verbs cannot be used in any continuous tenses. Also, certain non-continuous meanings for Mixed Verbs cannot be used in continuous tenses. Instead of using Present Perfect Continuous with these verbs, you must use Present Perfect. Examples: Sam has been having his car for two years. Not Correct Sam has had his car for two years. Correct by this logic, isn't it better to say : Matt and Sarah have had some difficulties in their relationship lately, so they have been going to a marriage counselor.  
_________________
---Winners do it differently---
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 68
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 8
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
08 Sep 2012, 08:12
Hi Eli, can you please look at thr problem below Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in
1991. and dated at 34 million years old, made it the
earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles Islands. (A) sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of (B) sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has been dated at 34 million years old, thus making it the earliest mammal known on (C) sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of (D) sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on (E) sloth which, found in Puerto Ricoin 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the earliest known mammal of The OA is D now my question is, when I know the time when sloth was found I.e in 1991, why should I use had been here? because as per your logic I can use had been only if I didnt know the time of finding of sloth..?? can someone help me with correct usage of had been/has been??
_________________
Life is very similar to a boxing ring.
Defeat is not final when you fall down…
It is final when you refuse to get up and fight back!
1 Kudos = 1 thanks
Nikhil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 572
Location: Cambridge, MA
Followers: 52
Kudos [?]:
130
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan [#permalink]
08 Sep 2012, 13:22
nikhil007 wrote: Hi Eli, can you please look at thr problem below
Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in
1991. and dated at 34 million years old, made it the
earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles Islands.
(A) sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at
34 million years old, made it the earliest known
mammal of
(B) sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has
been dated at 34 million years old, thus making
it the earliest mammal known on
(C) sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was
dated at 34 million years old, making this the
earliest known mammal of
(D) sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been
dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth
the earliest known mammal on
(E) sloth which, found in Puerto Ricoin 1991, was
dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the
earliest known mammal of
The OA is D
now my question is, when I know the time when sloth was found I.e in 1991, why should I use had been here?
because as per your logic I can use had been only if I didnt know the time of finding of sloth..?? can someone help me with correct usage of had been/has been?? "have been" is used for the dating process--we don't know when in the past the laboratory dating tests were completed!
_________________
Eli Meyer
Kaplan Teacher
http://www.kaptest.com/GMAT
Prepare with Kaplan and save $150 on a course!
Kaplan Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Usage of HAVE BEEN - Kaplan
[#permalink]
08 Sep 2012, 13:22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Zarrolou, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat
|
close
