«Is there any difficulty to notice the time span? I don't think so.»
According to that explanation, PTS is just a time span wherein lie all actions expressed by Present Perfect. Is that a good idea to define time through tense?
«...has a PTS which ranges from SOME POINT IN THE PAST to now»
Yes, they are right here. "Some point" can be the date of birth of that person (as a lower estimate).
In general, PTS denotes a time interval closed an the right end, the left end being located in minus infinity. In oter words, whatever point you take, it is always to the left of it. But that's not a definition, just a feature of PTS. The only definition I have seen is throug the tense.
«However, the quote has only demonstrated the catastrophe of one-sentence basis, which fails to tell where is "SOME POINT IN THE PAST" in (3).»
No catastrophe here. The sentence doesn't provide a certain left point, and the quotation does nothing more than admit this fact.
«Henry divorced his wife and left the country in 1999. He has lived in Somerville."»
To native/good English speakers (and engtense, of course):
1) Is it a good example?
2) Isn't it possible that Henry lived in Somerville before 1999?
And: divorced->divorced with.
«So why is there any difficulty in understanding the Perfect Time Span for Present Perfect tense?»
Because PTS is not actually just a time interval. An action's being locatated in PTS dependnd not only on the time thereof, but also on the readers attitude towards it: In different contexts the same action can be expressed in Past Simple (not in PTS) and in Present Perfect (in PTS). Thus, PTS is an essential property of the Present Perfect tense, not of Time...
«Henry has lived in Somerville" doesn't imply 'to now'»
No, it does. But in a different way. This sentence says that somewhere in the time period since however long ago to Now lies the interval of the action of Henry's living there.
«Therefore, a more correct example will appear like this:
Ex: "Henry divorced his wife and left the country in 1999. He has lived in Somerville. Now he works in Hong Kong."»
Again I address this native/good English speakers (and to engtense):
1) Is it a good example? (I don't think so)
2) Isn't it possible that Henry lived in Somerville before 1999?
(divorced->divorced with.)
20IR: «But please, don't tell me you're going for 2000 now!»
What if we do? And why do you use a dynamically changing nick?
«You are the only person who claims doesn't know how to locate the Perfect Time. If another agrees with you, the number is expanding. Ask them to support you.»
Don't need number. I need the truth ;)
According to that explanation, PTS is just a time span wherein lie all actions expressed by Present Perfect. Is that a good idea to define time through tense?
«...has a PTS which ranges from SOME POINT IN THE PAST to now»
Yes, they are right here. "Some point" can be the date of birth of that person (as a lower estimate).
In general, PTS denotes a time interval closed an the right end, the left end being located in minus infinity. In oter words, whatever point you take, it is always to the left of it. But that's not a definition, just a feature of PTS. The only definition I have seen is throug the tense.
«However, the quote has only demonstrated the catastrophe of one-sentence basis, which fails to tell where is "SOME POINT IN THE PAST" in (3).»
No catastrophe here. The sentence doesn't provide a certain left point, and the quotation does nothing more than admit this fact.
«Henry divorced his wife and left the country in 1999. He has lived in Somerville."»
To native/good English speakers (and engtense, of course):
1) Is it a good example?
2) Isn't it possible that Henry lived in Somerville before 1999?
And: divorced->divorced with.
«So why is there any difficulty in understanding the Perfect Time Span for Present Perfect tense?»
Because PTS is not actually just a time interval. An action's being locatated in PTS dependnd not only on the time thereof, but also on the readers attitude towards it: In different contexts the same action can be expressed in Past Simple (not in PTS) and in Present Perfect (in PTS). Thus, PTS is an essential property of the Present Perfect tense, not of Time...
«Henry has lived in Somerville" doesn't imply 'to now'»
No, it does. But in a different way. This sentence says that somewhere in the time period since however long ago to Now lies the interval of the action of Henry's living there.
«Therefore, a more correct example will appear like this:
Ex: "Henry divorced his wife and left the country in 1999. He has lived in Somerville. Now he works in Hong Kong."»
Again I address this native/good English speakers (and to engtense):
1) Is it a good example? (I don't think so)
2) Isn't it possible that Henry lived in Somerville before 1999?
(divorced->divorced with.)
20IR: «But please, don't tell me you're going for 2000 now!»
What if we do? And why do you use a dynamically changing nick?
«You are the only person who claims doesn't know how to locate the Perfect Time. If another agrees with you, the number is expanding. Ask them to support you.»
Don't need number. I need the truth ;)