This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site, while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used. For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Cookie settings
since..... when....
off market

Glossary entry

English term or phrase:

the letter has been filed on May 17, 2005 (grammar question)

English answer:

the letter was filed on May 17, 2005

Added to glossary by airmailrpl
May 17, 2005 07:31
19 yrs ago
2 viewers *
English term

the letter has been filed on May 17, 2005 (grammar question)

English Other Linguistics
May 17, 2005 is today

However, I believe that the above construction is wrong. Please confirm or rebut my opinion.

If possible, please provide references to grammar guides on the Internat
Responses
4 +4 alternatives
5 +1 incorrect
4 +2 the letter has been filed on may 17, 2005 (grammar question)
5 +1 the letter has been filed as of today
3 it looks correct to me

Discussion

RHELLER May 17, 2005:
For what it's worth, I think it's fine :-)
Non-ProZ.com May 17, 2005:
Ian ! it's me "who needs need the natives" :)
Non-ProZ.com May 17, 2005:
Let me through some light on the situation -
1. A colleague of mine is willing to write this phrase "the letter has been filed [with the Ukrainian Patent Office] on May 17, 2005 " in her report to the client

2. I am feeling that she is wrong

3. Still, she says that she can write this way "the letter has been filed on May 17, 2005 "
because
1) the phrase "the letter has been filed today" is correct (and I agree here) and
2) May 17, 2005 is today's date
Tony M May 17, 2005:
What do you think is wrong? The fact that they use the perfect tense for the present time? Is this your own text you want to correct, or are you querying a source text?

Responses

+4
46 mins
Selected

alternatives

the letter is being filed on May 17, 2005
the letter will be filed on May 17, 2005
the letter is filed as of May 17, 2005
the letter will have been filed on May 17, 2005
the letter was filed on May 17, 2005
Peer comment(s):
agree Robert Donahue (X) : "This letter shall be filed on the 17th day of May in the year of our Lord 2005"? :-)
2 hrs
agree rangepost : with-the letter was filed on May 17, 2005
7 hrs
agree Quicksilver : the letter was filed
1 day 18 hrs
agree Alfa Trans (X)
2 days 6 hrs
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Ian Winick's answer which I had been going to select had mysteriously disappeared ... therefore I am selecting a good answer with the largest number of "agree" 's Anyway, many thanks to everybody !"
8 mins

it looks correct to me

finished present action

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 hr 19 mins (2005-05-17 08:51:38 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

it\'s not all black or white!
depends whether you are only a learner who wants to stick rigidly to the rules.

i can percieve a certain degree of pressure to announce the result, in such cases such structures are unusual but NOT IMPOSSIBLE:

Grammars usually say that the present perfect cannot be used together with expressions of finished time - we can say (I have seen him) or (I saw him yesterday), but not (i have seen him yesterday). In fact, such structures are unusual but not impossible (though learners should avoid them). They often occur in brief news items, where space is limited and there is pressure to announce the news and give the details in the same clause.

Here are some real examples taken from news broadcasts, newspaper articles, advertisements, letters and conversations:

I am pleased to confirm that Lloyds Bank ... has opened a Home Loan account for you on 19th May.

I have stocked the infirmary cupboard only yesterday.

A 24-year-old soldier has been killed in a road accident last night.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs 5 mins (2005-05-17 09:36:58 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

sorry, i should have mentioned - it was taken from p. 443
\'Practical English Usage\' by Michael Swan, Oxford University Press 2005.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs 44 mins (2005-05-17 10:16:03 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

further to your additional note:

you are both right:
you - because it\'s unusual grammatically.
her - because it\'s not impossible. see my comments.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs 50 mins (2005-05-17 10:22:00 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

to writeaway:
professional (and shall i say \'noble\'?) IMHO would be to ADD your further comments and NOT DELETE your old ones:

Old opinion: disagree
Old comment: you are wrong here. full stop. if you want to believe you
are correct and that native speakers have no clue about
their own language, that is your privilege.

New opinion: disagree
New comment: you are wrong here. full stop. as soon as a time or date has
been given,it\'s a past action.the letter has been filed and
now we... is how the pr.perf. could be used-has to tie in
with present. is that professional enough?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs 53 mins (2005-05-17 10:25:32 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

to writeaway again:
because i don\'t have the same editing function as you do. you can change you comment endlessly. i can\'t. not fair.
Peer comment(s):
disagree Catherine Bolton : If the action is finished AND you include the timing, you should use the simple past. Present perfect would be correct if the sentence read "The letter has been filed". ADDED COMMENT: It's a tad offense for you to call native speakers "only learners".
3 mins
i wouldn't be so categorical if i were you. see my additional comments. +++ 'only learners' means 'only learners' - native or non-native. you are putting words into my mouth.
disagree writeaway : you are wrong here. full stop. as soon as a time or date has been given,it's a past action.the letter has been filed and now we... is how the pr.perf. could be used-has to tie in with present. is that professional enough?
2 hrs
it is not about my being right or wrong here. it's about the reality of the english language usage. i have explained how this structure could be possible and in what situations and substantiated it from MICHAEL SWAN'S book. please keep it professional.
agree Tony M : Actually, I totally agree with you! This is actually quite common in business use, particularly in letters that will be read after the date in question... // Now, now, don't get sarky! :-)
2 hrs
hey! support from the unexpected quater :-) . thank you very much!
agree Robert Donahue (X) : Not quite sure what the fuss is here. As Dusty states, these things are common in business. Do resumes (ones that get looked at anyway) follow standard English grammar? No. Business correspondence doesn't always either. :-)
3 hrs
me neither :-)
Something went wrong...
+1
15 mins

incorrect

You can't use Present Perfect if you answer the question "When?"



--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs 20 mins (2005-05-17 10:51:59 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

It has been sent today, on May 17. - Then Present Rerfect is OK.
Peer comment(s):
neutral sergey (X) : i wouldn't be so categorical. it's limiting.
1 hr
The rule is limiting. Thank you, anyway
agree IanW (X) : Perfectly correct
2 hrs
Thank you
disagree Tony M : In certain contexts, it is perfectly acceptable and common
2 hrs
agree Catherine Bolton : With Ian on this one... and what was that about the natives? ;-)
2 hrs
Thank you
neutral Robert Donahue (X) : w. Dusty and Sergey here. There are exceptions.
3 hrs
Something went wrong...
+2
3 hrs

the letter has been filed on may 17, 2005 (grammar question)

I'm actually quite suprised this question has raised such a polemic --- when I first read this sentence, it seemed perfectly natural to me. I can't say I LIKE the construction, but it certainly seems quite familiar to me, and is common enough not to be able to be merely dismissed as imprecise grammar. I think my appreciation of it probably comes from my rather dated background in commercial correspondence, with its own inimitable style.

The writer might well have written (and I don't think anyone could object to...) "I have filed your letter today, 17th May" --- but as is so often the case in commercial and formal correspondence, the use of the impersonal passive is preferred, leadin (IMO) to the whole problem. Surely you can quite legitimately say "Your letter has been filed today, 17th May"?
Peer comment(s):
agree Nick Lingris : I wholeheartedly agree with "Your letter has been filed today, 17th May"
24 mins
Cheers, Nick! ;-)
agree Arcoiris : your letter has been filed today, 17th May. Perhaps the comma after today makes things clearer?
1 hr
Thanks, Apricitas!
neutral IanW (X) : I have no problem with ""Your letter has been filed today, 17th May", but I have a problem with "the letter has been filed on May 17"
2 hrs
Thanks, Ian!
Something went wrong...
+1
3 hrs

the letter has been filed as of today

If she filed it sometime today, this is the only way to use the present perfect tense (has been filed) and get away with it.

Once you mention the date, the person who will receive and read the letter, will just think the present perfect is being used incorrectly, as incorrectly as in the examples Michael Swann quotes from the press. You can be doctrinaire about this point of usage.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs 46 mins (2005-05-17 11:18:40 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I also quite agree with Dusty\'s: \"Your letter has been filed today, 17th May\".
Peer comment(s):
agree Merit : Indeed. Let's not start imitating 'news' English.
1 hr
I haven't got this recent edition of Michael Swann's book, but I'm sure he too frowns on such combinations.
Something went wrong...
Close search
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search