Is "is been" a valid construction?

I have found sentences in some contexts which surprisingly use "is" and "been" together:

• He is been watching too much television lately.
• She is been feeling a little depressed.
• The compiler is been failed to compile the code.

Why are these not:

• He has been watching too much television lately.
• She has been feeling a little depressed.
• The compiler has failed to compile the code.

A similar use is found in the first sentence of this answer on StackOverflow. That was my question about Java Server Pages (JSP). Do the first group of sentences add some extra meaning, or they are just used in a fashionable manner, or something else involved?

Finally, I once saw this:

• The work is been being done by someone else.

I was taken aback by this sentence. I found it totally dramatic—it appears to be in the "present perfect continuous tense", which shouldn't have passive construction according to any grammar rules I know.

When are such constructions used? I'm a resident of India and don't really understand them.

Solution 1:

I wouldn't be too surprised if the first two are examples of the same sort of "misheard->misspelled" transitions that result in a lot of younger people thinking that "should of been" is a valid construction; I could totally see how someone could go from hearing "he has been" and "he's been" to thinking that "he is been" is what was actually said.

However, all three of your initial examples are bad grammar and should be avoided; your suggested versions are correct.

Solution 2:

'Is been' is used in a dialect of English-cockney, spoken in the suburbs of London, East London. So, I think, 'She is been watching too much 'telly' lately' is used there.

Incidentally, 'is been' is the passive of the auxiliary 'to be'. So, in "She is watching too much television lately", the grammatically correct form of the verb in the passive is the above: 'She is been watching too much telly lately'; which, of course, does not require an interchange of subject and object, but, since the 'voice' in 'Active and Passive voice' refers mostly to the verb, this could be allowed? Anyway, we are all 'passive' mostly in front of a TV so the above sentence becomes correct even more so-it uses less 'redundancy' as there is no exchange of subject and object. So, dialects are not only grammatically correct but are also precise-here, less 'redundancy', etc? Dialects 'probably' use the grammatically correct structures and are more precise, which modify with time- and so protests are made by 'mavens' often?

Please read these other examples and comment: In the sentence: I am to write a report-is the passive-A report is been to be written by me? And, in 'He is to write a report'; and, 'They are to write reports', are the passive forms: A report is been to be written by him; and, Reports are been to be written by them? Please try to classify: 'Is been', 'Are been'- are they 'dialectical' or 'wrong'? Why?So..since this post was made 2 years ago, if this 'is seen' by anyone, please reply. Thanks.

Solution 3:

Is been is definitely not correct. As Hellion says, it could be a mis-hearing of 'he's been', but even then it shows a suprising lack of basic grammar.

Another possibility is that it is a mis-hearing of 'being'. It may be a local thing, but in my local Indian community (Singapore) I have heard "being [verb]ing", as though they are trying to describe a state of being in action. My hunch is that it is an import from their mother tongue, but that is only a hunch - I have no research to support it.