Languages > Language-specific analysis

He lived in the US for 30 years


Hi Everyone   pl.look at the sentence.  # He lived in the US for 30 years.Does the sentence  hav the implication that he doesn't  live in the U.S anymore? THANKS IN ADVAN

Yes, in contrast to "lives" or "has lived". It says nothing about the present, so why would it apply to the present? If I say "I ate an apple" does that mean I'm currently eating an apple? It doesn't state that I'm not, so we don't know, but you wouldn't assume I am. And therefore, with something over more general relevance to life, like living in a certain place, it would be unusual to say "lived" if it's still true today-- why not use the present? It's not like eating an apple where you might eat a different apple every day. We generally think of living as one general experience of life. You could say for example: "I lived here many years ago, then I went elsewhere, and now I'm back." But that's not the default assumption. Similar other usage would be things like "I was a vegetarian."

One similar  case too, D.Trump was the president of the US in 2017, The use of past tense doesn't  make the situation entirely in past, does it?

No. It's simply stating a fact about 2017. It doesn't say anything else. In that context, the assumption would be that you care about 2017 for some specific reason (like a historical event). The present is irrelevant. Note that this is different from "He was president" without a specific contextually-relevant time. If you asked me "Say some facts about 2017" and I said "He was president", then it wouldn't have any implicature about the present either.


[0] Message Index

Go to full version