Is there any difference between Present Perfect and Present Perfect Continuous?
I have studied "present perfect" and "present perfect continuous" for a week. I know forms, verb and helping verb I should use when I write them.
For me, they have nearly same definition because I can use them interchangeably in Thai language. (My native language)
For example, the sentences
- I have learned English language in the past few weeks.
- I have been learning English language in the past few weeks.
have no difference in meaning to me. They both mean "I began learning the English language in the past and I am still learning it"
Can I use them interchangeably in English? Or is there any difference between them? For example, when should I use present perfect but not present perfect continuous?
Solution 1:
This is a difficult area of English for foreign learners, and I’m afraid you’re not going to understand it fully from a few answers here. Very briefly, you use the present perfect continuous form to talk about events in the recent past, particularly activities that have not been completed. The form is often found with the prepositions ‘for’ and ‘since’, as in ‘He’s been speaking for a very long time’ or ‘I’ve been working non-stop since this morning’.
Here are a few examples contrasting the present perfect with the present perfect continuous:
'I’ve done my homework' (it’s finished) / 'I’ve been doing my homework' (it’s not finished)
‘I’ve drunk my coffee' (it’s all gone) / ‘I’ve been drinking my coffee’ (there’s some left)
‘It’s rained every day since the weekend’ (repeated rain) / ‘It’s been raining all day’ (continuous rain)
Your own examples don’t really illustrate the use very well. You wouldn’t say ‘I have learned English language in the past few weeks’, because that suggests you’ve finished your studies and you don’t need to do any more. That’s unrealistic. No one learns English in a few weeks. I think these two examples might show the difference more clearly:
‘I have been studying English for two years’ (I’m still studying it)
'I have studied English, but I don’t speak it very well' (I studied it at some time in the past, but am not studying it any more)
Solution 2:
"I have learned the English language in the past few weeks" implies that you have completed learning it. "I have been learning the English language" doesn't imply it.
This isn't true in all cases. "I have been eating blueberries for the past few weeks" means nearly the same thing as "I have eaten blueberries for the past few weeks."
On the other hand, "I have eaten the plums that were in the icebox" means that they are all gone, while "I have been eating the plums that were in the icebox" does not. The difference here is that "the plums that were in the icebox" is much more specific than "blueberries". As Barrie says in his answer, this is a fairly tricky area of English to learn.
Solution 3:
"I have learned English language in the past few weeks" and "I have been learning English language in the past few weeks" have only a slight difference in meaning, and, even then, some might not pick up on that difference unless the two statements were put together, side-by-side.
"I have learned" implies a sense of finality (as though maybe the learning is now over), while "I have been learning" implies that the activity is not necessarily over yet, and may continue.
So, a choir member might say "We have practiced our song over the past two weeks" on the eve of a show, but opt for "We have been practicing our song for a whole week" when they still have a week of practice remaining.
This difference is very subtle, though, and there are many cases where using one in place of the other wouldn't confuse a native speaker or listener.
That said, "I have learned" can also refer to something was taught a long time ago: "I have learned the difference between right and wrong" could be said by a penitent criminal who has learned a very recent lesson, or by an aged man who learned the difference long ago. "I have been learning" wouldn't normally be used for such long-ago learning (although there may be some exceptions; this community has a way of finding them!)
Solution 4:
Sometimes the two tenses are interchangeable, as in the OP's example. But sometimes they are not. Essentially, it depends on whether the action denoted by the verb is regarded by the speaker as completable or not. By this definition, living and learning, for example, are not completable, in which case both tenses are possible:
- I've been living in London since 2001.
- I've lived in London since 2001.
Conversely, if the verb is completable then the present perfect is used to indicate that the action has indeed been completed, whereas the continuous form implies only that the action was carried out, but with no indication if it was completed. For example:
- I've read the book.
means I've finished reading it. Whereas:
- I've been reading the book.
means only that I was in the process of reading it. It carries no implication that the reading is complete. Indeed, it tends to imply that the reading is not complete. There's a similar difference in meaning between:
- I have been learning the irregular verbs.
- I have learned the irregular verbs.
In this case the verb learn is conceived by the speaker as completable.
Solution 5:
The following examples could help you understanding the difference in meaning:
"I have done ballet for years." : I did ballet in the past and up to and including the present, but I may getting bored with it.
"I have been doing ballet for years." : I did ballet in the past and have continued until the present time and probably will continue in the future. I haven't finished with it yet. Ballet is here for the duration.
As we can understand, the difference in meaning is not so slight.
It is simply to create a parallelism between the above examples and (your) "I have learned ..."/"I have been learning ... ."
Note that tenses put actions into the past, present and future, the 'may-yet-be' or the 'might-have-been'.