This is a grammar point that has bugged me for a while. At my school, the grammar books explain been as being the present perfect verb for the verb to be. When I look at the following sentence:
I have been to America
I do not take this as meaning the verb to be, or the verb, when converted to have a present tense meaning would - to my inexperienced eyes - to mean:
I am to America
Which is obviously bad grammar. Maybe this is one of those little (a euphimistic adjectice, I know) idiosyncracies of the English language, but I just cant figure it out. What I look at the first sentence, have been to means:
I have gone to America (but I have since returned). Please help, as I’d hate to think I was developing a reading disorder.
First of all, yes, “been” is the past participle of “be”.
“I have been to America.”
This must indicate that the verb is “be” since the present perfect structure (have + pp) is used, and that necessitates a verb, and the verb in the sentence is “be”.
So that takes care of the syntax. The meaning, however, is another story.
I think this is one of those exceptions in which the present perfect tense of “be” can be used to mean the same as the present perfect tense of “go” - ie, “I have gone to America.” Common usage makes this latter example sound awkward when speaking about visiting a country.
But for other tenses, one wouldn’t use “be” to indicate visiting a place, unless you’re talking about actually being in a place.
I’m sure someone somewhere has written about this case for pages and pages, but suffice to say, I’m happy calling it an exception and moving on to lunch.
“I have been to America” is derived from “I am in America”. The “in” is changed to “to” because you are not there now. And like Jefferson said “have been to” carries a “gone to” sense as well, but “have been to” emphasizes perhaps more the fact of having been “in” that place for some period of time rather than the fact of having made the trip.
Also “Have gone to” is used often in contexts like - Q. Where’s George? A. He’s gone to the river races (he left for there some time ago and is either there or on his way there now) - so using “have been TO” just clarifies which of the meanings of the present perfect you are intending.
I wrote on the board, “Medicine has improved.” and they told me that I was wrong. That I should have written, “Medicine has BEEN improved.” Told them to be quiet (men adult class) and that I was the teacher. Not them.
[quote=“bob”]“I have been to America” is derived from “I am in America”. The “in” is changed to “to” because you are not there now. And like Jefferson said “have been to” carries a “gone to” sense as well, but “have been to” emphasizes perhaps more the fact of having been “in” that place for some period of time rather than the fact of having made the trip.
[/quote]
Hear, hear! You are a genius! (or is it "Here, Here!?)
[quote=“bob”]“I have been to America” is derived from “I am in America”. The “in” is changed to “to” because you are not there now. And like Jefferson said “have been to” carries a “gone to” sense as well, but “have been to” emphasizes perhaps more the fact of having been “in” that place for some period of time rather than the fact of having made the trip.
[/quote]
I thought that ‘I’ve been to’ was as much as … ‘I was there but am back now’.
i would say that “been to” is used to talk about the experience of going somewhere that is in some way interesting, “gone to” the action of going somewhere more ordinary.
