Level: intermediate
There are two tenses in English: past and present.
The present tense is used to talk about the present and to talk about the future.
There are four present tense forms:
| Present simple | I work |
|---|---|
| Present continuous | I am working |
| Present perfect | I have worked |
| Present perfect continuous | I have been working |
We can use all these forms:
- to talk about the present:
London is the capital of Britain.
He works at McDonald’s.
He is working at McDonald's.
He has worked there for three months now.
He has been working there for three months now.
- to talk about the future:
The next train leaves this evening at 17.00.
I'll phone you when I get home.
He is meeting Peter in town this afternoon.
I'll come home as soon as I have finished work.
You will be tired out after you have been working all night.
- Present tense 1
- MultipleChoice_MTYyMzQ=
- Present tense 2
- GapFillTyping_MTYyMzU=
Level: advanced
We can use present forms to talk about the past:
- when we are telling a story:
Well, it's a lovely day and I'm just walking down the street when I see this funny guy walking towards me. Obviously he's been drinking, because he's moving from side to side …
- when we are summarising something we have read, heard or seen:
I love Ian Rankin's novels. He writes about this detective called Rebus. Rebus lives in Edinburgh and he's a brilliant detective, but he's always getting into trouble. In one book, he gets suspended and they tell him to stop working on this case. But he takes no notice …
- Present tense 3
- MultipleChoice_MTYyMzY=
- Present tense 4
- GapFillTyping_MTYyMzk=
I object very strongly to what he said and I'll let him know. (exception)
--> I took exception to what he said and I'll let him know.
Hi, why is the verb "object" in the present tense but when transformed to "take exception" it becomes past tense "took"?
Hello 343463,
I have no idea. There is no reason to change the tense here, so 'I take exception...' would be much closer in meaning to the original sentence.
This is not an example from our site, as far as I know, so you should really ask the author of the example. Of course, it may simply be a slip while speaking or writing.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nice British Council people,
Trying to clear up a point here.
What name is given to that present tense which is affirmative.
"I dash", "I am dashing" - all fine, yet what formal name is given to the form "I do dash" when countering a negative suggestion?
E.g. "You don't smoke do you?" "No, but I do drink excessively." etc etc
Many Thanks.
Hello Nene rhymes with Hen,
There is no specific name for this. It is the use of an auxiliary verb to add emphasis but the tense (whether present simple or past simple) remains the same. When another verb form is used we simply emphasise the existing auxiliary by stressing the word when speaking or using some form of typographical emphasis such as bold or italic when writing).
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello, please explain the following joke? Which present tense does the frog use at the end of the joke?
A librarian is working at her desk when she notices that a chicken has come into the library and is waiting to be served. When the chicken sees that it has got the librarian's attention, it says, 'Booook! Book! Book! Book!' So the librarian gives the chicken a couple of books, and the chicken takes the books and runs out of the library. The next day, the chicken comes back and again says, 'Booook! Book! Book! Book!' So the librarian gives the chicken a few more books, and again the chicken grabs them and runs away. On the third day, the chicken comes back yet again and says, 'Booook! Book! Book! Book!' By now, the librarian has been thinking a lot about the strange chicken and she's decided to find out what's going on. So, after she's given the chicken some more books, she waits for it to leave and then follows it out of the library. The librarian follows the chicken through the car park, down the street and into a big park. After a few minutes, the chicken reaches a lake in the middle of the park. Next to the lake, there's a small, angry-looking frog. The chicken shows the books to the frog and the frog, looking at the books one by one, shakes his head and says, 'Read it! Read it! Read it!'
Hello kanaanabdullah2256,
The frog's last words are not present tense at all but rather use the past participle. The verb 'read' is irregular:
present - read - pronounced /ri:d/
past - read - pronounced /red/
past participle - read - pronounced /red/
The joke relies on understanding that in English the sound frogs make is usually said and written as something like 'reddit', which sounds the same as 'I have read it.'
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Ohhhhhhhhh, thank you so much. this is imaginative discerption, I am really enjoyed to learn that.
Sir they is used with third person so why do we use words like cooks,studies,e.t.c.
Hi saket mishra,
He, she and it are third person singular. It uses the verb with "s" (e.g. He cooks / She studies / It works).
They is third person plural. It uses the base verb, without "s" (e.g. They cook).
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Why does it say only two tenses? What about future tense? Isn't that a tense?
Hi SurajBeka,
Actually, no, it isn't! Technically speaking, a "tense" is a verb form which shows the time of the action, e.g. play - present, played - past. The important thing is that it is a verb form - that is, the base verb is modified e.g. by adding "ed" to make the past tense.
However, to talk about the future, we do not change the base verb, but instead add another verb: will play. Since the verb "play" itself isn't modified, this means that "will play" is not a tense. Instead, we can more properly call it a future form, the "will" future, the future with "will" or something similar.
That said, it is quite common for teachers and materials to call "will" + verb the future tense, for convenience when teaching and explaining. But as I've explained, that is not a technically correct description.
I hope that helps!
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Hello,
Coould you please help me to understand why we use present simple in this sentence
After Howard finishes his studies he intends to work in his father's company.
And can we make this sentence like this:
Howard intends to work in his father's company after he will finish his studies
Hi .Mariia,
It's because of "after". The present simple is used to indicate a future action/situation in subordinate clauses with "after", "when", "before", "until", "as soon as", "if", "provided that" and some other conjunctions of time. For example:
The meaning of your final sentence is perfectly understandable but grammatically, it should be "... after he finishes his studies". I hope that helps to understand it!
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Thank you, Jonathan
Your explanation really helps me to understand it
Hello, everybody.
I would like to know if it is correct to add the word "tense" after names such as "Present Simple", "Present Continuous", "Past Simple, Past Continuous" etc. Is it correct to say the "Present Continuous Tense", for example? Also, is it correct to say that there are six simple and six continuous tenses in English? Is the word "tense" correctly used here?
All the best,
MarBe
Hi MarBe,
It's an interesting question, and one that isn't as easy to answer as it may seem!
A tense can be defined technically as a type of verb conjugation that expresses time. When linguists analyse language, this is what they mean when they say "tense". For this reason, at the top of this page it says that English has only two tenses, present and past (e.g. work - worked). Future actions are expressed using modal verbs (e.g. "will") or other structures (e.g. "going to"), so these aren't considered tenses because they don't involve verb conjugation. The same goes for structures such as continuous and perfect structures (these are called aspects, and they are made by adding auxiliary verbs rather than conjugating).
However, that is a technical definition. In more everyday discussions of language, as well as in English learning materials, people often use "tense" with a looser and wider meaning, including all of the structures mentioned above. Although it's technically incorrect to call "I will go ..." the future tense, for example, it's common for materials, teachers and students to do so.
So I guess the answer to your question depends on how technical you need to be. Does that make sense?
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Dear team,
I wonder if you tell me the difference between the present continuous and 'll when they are used to refer to the future.
For example:
You're having a fever! Put on your coat and I'm taking you to see a doctor( or I'll take you to see a doctor).
Also, I wonder if 'would take' works here.
All the best
Jones
Hi Jones,
Thanks for your question! "Will" is the right word here, because "will" is used when you make a decision at the moment of speaking. In this example, it seems like the speaker has only just noticed the other person's fever, so the speaker is making this decision spontaneously.
The present continuous normally shows a future action that has been organised and confirmed, and often it has been organised or confirmed with other people. For example, you could say I'm taking Jane to see a doctor if you have already made the doctor's appointment in advance, before the moment that you say this.
You may find our page on Future forms interesting. It has some more explanation and examples. If you have other questions, we welcome you to post your questions on that page.
I hope that helps!
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Hello Teachers,
"Before I sever your head from your body, I ask you again, who are you?"
I tell you straight!- not to quarrel with me.
Why the writer has written ask you again not am asking you again. Why he uses simple present though it was an ongoing action and also for tell in the second sentence. Could you explain it?
Regards
Jitu_jaga
Hello jitu_jaga,
This sounds like an older style of English, such as a Monty Python skit taking place in the middle ages. In older styles, a present simple form is acceptable.
All the best,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hi sir, Is it possible to use Present tense to talk a thing/one' nature/ attribute even though it/ one has physically disappeared? like someone stands in front of their friend's grave and says " you are my best friend ever" not " you were my best friend ever"
or statements that similar to "Albert Einstein/ Leo is a genius of all time", "Mahamta Gandhi is a figure who everyone respects".
My point is to bring a opinion/ fact that, at least to me, is true to this present
I would say this explanation "when we are summarising something we have read, heard or seen:" is the answer of my problem
Thanks, I looking forward to your respon sir
Hello LittleBlueGreat,
It is possible to use the present simple to speak about general truths, which can include making statements about people who have passed away. In such cases, we're often making statements about their legacies or contributions more than we are about them as people with ordinary lives that they are living at the moment.
If I were standing before a friend's grave and speaking to them, I'd probably say 'You were my best friend ever'; although me speaking to them now means they are still alive for me in one sense, the fact that I'm remembering our time together also makes it clear they are gone. The fact that I'm saying it to them suggests I'm missing them, which means they aren't present.
But I'm not saying it's impossible to say 'You are my best friend ever' in a situation like this. It's a very personal kind of thing, after all, and so I can't say for sure what someone else might be thinking.
I hope this helps you make sense of it.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
This page explains that there are two tenses in English. present and past.
I want to read more about it. please help me.
is there not a future tense in English?
what about:
will v1
will be v4
will have v3
will have been v4
Hi Prakash,
It's a good question. First, I should define what a tense is: it is a form of a verb that expresses time. For example, take and took are the present tense and past tense of the verb take.
Technically speaking, will take is not a form of the verb take, because it is not made by changing the form of take itself. Instead, it is made by adding another verb (will) which supplies the future time meaning. That's why we can't call will take a tense.
However, in common and non-technical speaking, people do commonly say that will + infinitive verb is the "future tense" (even though from a technical point of view, that term is incorrect).
I hope that helps to understand it.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank you Jonathan.
Dear team hello,
More and more people (are getting divorced)/(getting divorced) every year.
Which one is the true answer?
Thank you
Hi Hosseinpour,
It should be the first answer, as the present continuous needs the auxiliary verb "be" (here, in the form "are"). Another possible answer not listed here is "get divorced" (present simple).
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello sir,
More and more people (are getting divorced)/(getting divorced) every year.
(Every year), can we use "present continuous" to talk about "a fact" such as this?
Thank you
Hello Hosseinpour,
Yes, you can use continuous aspect like this. The continuous form emphasises that it is an ongoing process rather than a fixed fact.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank you for the help and time.
Hello, Everyone.
Could somebody help me understand why in task "Present Tense 3" the correct answer isn't Present Tense, but Present Perfect?
Thank you in advance.
Hi georgiatavares,
Good question! It's because at the end, the frog means "I've read it", in the present perfect. (That's why the frog shakes his head and rejects all the books that the chicken brought. He's already read them all.)
The word "read" can be either (1) the present simple form and the imperative, or (2) the past participle. (1) and (2) have the same spelling, but different pronunciation. (2) is pronounced /red/ (the same as the colour). (That's the joke - "read it" sounds similar to the sounds that frogs make, at least to English ears.)
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi there. "Do be careful" or "Be careful" which one is correct? Thanks in advance.
Hi Sajatadib,
Both are OK. The first one is more emphatic than the second one.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Hosseinpour,
The use of tenses here is fine. The first verb ("perceived") is past simple because it describes a completed past event. The other verbs are in the present simple because they describe things that are general statements not fixed to specific points in time.
There is no rule which says that we are limited to a single time reference or verb form in a sentence. It's quite possible to use a past form and a verb form with future reference, for example:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Hosseinpour,
This is an infinitive form. I'm sure you're familiar with the base form of the infinitive (to do), but there are many other forms:
to do
to be done (passive infinitive)
to be doing (continuous infinitive)
to have done (perfect infinitive)
etc.
These forms carry the meaning you would expect: continuous forms denote something in progress, perfect forms have a retrospective sense etc. The exact meaning will depend on the context.
As far as your example goes, you could use to arrive and I don't think the meaning changes as the context makes it clear that you are talking about a time up to now. In fact, as the context is clear I think to arrive would be a better choice, stylistically speaking.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear team,
There are some people who (can view) objects from 6 meters away with the same sharpness that a normal-sighted person (would have to move) in to 4.5 meters to achieve.
Why this structure(would have to move) is used? I can not understand the relationship between (can view) and (would have to move).
Thank you
Hello Hosseinpour,
The two verbs are not related in time or structure. The first describes the characteristics of certain people; the second describes a hypothetical point of comparison - you can insert an implied if-clause if you wish (...would have to move in to 4.5 metres if they wanted to achieve the same clarity).
You could change the first verb to talk about people in the past ('There were some people who could...') or to predict the existence of people in the future ('One day there will be some people who will be able to...') without changing the second verb form at all.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Peter M,
Thank you for your help, it was very useful.
Dear team,
A new study by Palaeontologists at the University of Southhampton 1.(suggests/has suggested) four bones recently found on the Isle of Wight 2.(belong to / have belonged to) new species of theropod dinosaur, the group that includes Tyrannosaurus rex and modern-day birds.
In this test,first part, recently shouts present perfect, but my feelings tell me go with the Present tense. The same issue with part two, also if I use (have belonged to) how will the sentence sound meaning-vice to the listener.
Thank you
Hello Hosseinpour,
I too would probably use the present simple form for 1, but there's nothing wrong with using the present perfect form in a news report, for example.
For 2, only the present simple form works. The topic is the bones (which obviously still exist) and what species they are from, not the dinosaur (which is obviously long dead, even if it is a newly discovered species), so a present simple form is best; a present perfect form would sound very odd indeed.
Hope this helps. It's great that you are trying to make sense of texts that you find in your reading -- this is a great way to learn.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Kirk,
Now with the explanation, it makes sense.
Thank you sir
Dear team,
Researchers believe that gold nanoparticles may breathe new life into once-promising drug candidates, in particular, a compound designed to stop the spread of HIV that (was shelved/would be shelved) because of effects.
Here (was shelved) is the right answer. Why (would be shelved) can not be the right answer?
Thank you
Hello Hosseinpour,
Generally, we don't comment on exercises from elsewhere as we have no control over their quality or accuracy. If you have a question about a task from a book or website then the authors of the task are the people to ask.
In this example, the time reference is past. You are talking about a drug which +was designed+ to do something but which had problems and so was not used (it was +once promising+). The only option with a past time sense is 'was shelved'. The other option ('would be shelved') describes a possible later action.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Peter,
Thank you for your time and help.