Most books and web pages say that the Present perfect progressive indicates
an action continuing from the past into the present and possibly into the future.

However, some web pages, such as shown below, seem to say that
the Present perfect progressive sometimes actually gives you an idea
that the activity WILL CONTINUE into the future.
Could you tell me if this interpretation is correct or incorrect and why?

>The Present Perfect Progressive tense can indicate that an activity
> started in the past and will continue.
>An art committee has photographed the entire Tower of Pisa.(the project is done)
>They have been organizing 64,000 photographs.(the project will continue)
http://smccd.net/accounts/sevas/esl/reviewlesson/presperf2b.html

>Present perfect progressive describes an action that is on-going
>from the past to the moment of speaking, implies that the action
>WILL CONTINUE, and emphasizes the action.
http://faculty.ulv.edu/~grekowic/week4text.htm

The present perfect progressive can but does not always imply that the action will continue into the future. The action may possibly continue into the future, but that is not always the case by any means.

Here's what Quirk et al.* state about the features of the present perfect progressive:

"Of the three features associated with the main meaning of the progressive--duration, limitation of duration, and possible incompleteness--the first two give the perfective progressive a sense of "temporariness...." (Section 4.38, p. 211, italics added)

This description characterizes the majority of cases, such as

We've been making progress on the research, but it's taking a lot longer than we thought

Have you been watching the news lately? I can hardly stand to watch it

But note the idea of "possible incompleteness." Incompleteness, the idea of "continuing into the future," is not always a part of the meaning. The present perfect progressive is also used to refer to an action in the recent past in terms of its effects more than the action itself. Quirk et al. give these examples of utterances in which the effects of the action are the focus:

You've been fighting again ['I can tell that from your black eye']

It's been snowing ['Look, the ground is white']

Have you been crying? ['Your eyes are red'] (Section 4.39, p. 212)

These utterances carry no implication that the action is going to continue into the future. They could be paraphrased with must have to indicate a logical conclusion from evidence:

You must have been fighting again

It must have been snowing

You must have been crying

So--the present perfect progressive may or may not imply that an action will continue into the future. All it really means is that the action has duration and is temporary. It may also mean that the action is incomplete (and may therefore continue), but that is not part of its basic meaning.

Marilyn Martin

Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, , G. Leech, and J. Svartvik, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (Longman, 1985)

Thank you very much for your kind and detailed explanation.
It's very helpful.

However, I am still a little puzzled. What is bothering me is this:

I have been waiting for her for two hours.
a. He will continue waiting for her, for she hasn't come.
b. He just stopped waiting for her.
c. The wait is possibly incomplete. (What he is doing nor will be doing, we can't tell from this sentence alone.)

Some people say that (a) is surely the case for this sentence because sometimes the present perfect progressive can imply that the action will continue into the future and this is the case. In other words, certain verbs in the present perfect progressive (e.g. I have been waiting for her for two hours., It has been raining for 3 days now.) will give you an idea that the action WILL(not could nor might) continue into the future.

On the other hand, some other people told me that (c) is the case and that the present perfect progressive itself nor verbs don't have the ability to tell if the action will continue into the future or not; It's only the context that can actually do that.

It's really confusing to me for we don't have this kind of tense and aspect in our language.
I would really appleciate it if you would give me a clue to find out which interpretation is correct or maybe both of them are incorrect in some ways.
Thank you.

There's nothing in the present progressive that guarantees that the action WILL continue into the future. Whoever said that the present progressive, as a part of its function, guarantees a continuation of the action into the future is mistaken. Here is a scenario, with two possible answers to the question:

A: I'm looking for a good dentist. Any ideas?

B: I've been going to Dr. Foss, but it's so hard to get an appointment with her I'm thinking of changing.

C: I've been going to Dr. Winslow. He's the best one I've had so far. You could see whether he will take you.

B: Well, I might give him a call too. I'm tired of waiting so long for an appointment.

While Person B is very likely not going to continue going to her dentist, Person C is going to stick with hers. The determining factor is the context, not the verb form.

Marilyn Martin

In this context, which verb form sounds better? And why? (Suppose "I" am still at a meeting place now.)
1) I have been waiting for her for two hours now. I wonder how much longer I will have to wait.
2) I have waited for her for two hours now. I wonder how much longer I will have to wait.

Thank you very much for your quick response as possible.
It's very helpful and believe I've got it this time.

1. Though person C is going to stick with hers, you cna't say that
the sentence "I've been going to Dr. Winslow." did imply that the
action will continue into the future. Because it could mean the
opposit as well.

2. It's only the following (or maybe sometimes the preceding) sentences
that can give you the idea what could happen in the future.

Am I understanding right?

First, to QQQ's question above:

In this case, the speaker is clearly going to continue waiting. One could use either form, but the present perfect progressive, I have been waiting, carries more of the possibility of continuing to wait.

Now, why is either form possible here, and not in the dialogue above among people comparing their dentists? Well, "I've been going to Dr. So-and-so" describes a series of repeated and individually completed events, while "I've been waiting for her" represents an uninterrupted, continuous, action.

The present perfect, 'I've gone to Dr. So-and-so" could denote a single event, while "I[/b]'ve waited[b]" represents an unbroken, continuous action, whether long or short. Still, the present perfect progressive emphasizes the duration of the wait more than does the present perfect, and carries more possibility of continuing.

It is not only the context but the nature of the verb phrase that determines the appropriate verb form.

>There's nothing in the present(perfect)
>progressive that guarantees that the action
>WILL continue into the future. Whoever said
>that the present(perfect)progressive,
>as a part of its function, guarantees a
>continuation of the action into
>the future is mistaken

Somebody told me that your statement above should
be interpreted as follows

>There's nothing in the present perfect
>progressive that guarantees or implys
>that the action WILL continue into the
>future.
>Only context tells you if the action will
>continue into the future.

Is this true? Does the present perfect
progressive not imply any future action
in any way?

See the sentences below.
1)She has been studying English for 10 years.
2)She has studied English for 10 years.
To me, when I compare those sentences,
1) sounds as if it imples that she will continue
studying it.
2) does not refer to any future action in any way.
Am I right?

Now to Chisholm's latest query:

Your understanding is correct. There is nothing in the present perfect progressive that assures the continuation of the action. The present perfect progressive is more likely than the present perfect to imply continuation, but it is not a guarantee of such continuation. Here's another example:

Kurt's parents have lived in the same house for 35 years. But they've been living in their motor home for the past six months while the house has been undergoing major renovation. It's finished now, and they''re moving back today, much to their relief.

The idea behind the present perfect progressive, like that of all the progressives, is duration, but the verb form itself does not mean that the action will continue. It may or may not continue, depending on the overall context.

Marilyn Martin

Hi, I have a doubt about present perfect progressive and present perfect.When I Say:a) I have been living here for 10 years and b)I have lived here for 10 years.Can I say both?What is the correct to stress the durantion of time? I want to say that I live in there about 10 years.

I'm not sure what, exactly, you need to know, but I can say that the present perfect progressive gives more of a sense of duration that the simple present perfect does. At the same time the present perfect progressive gives the idea [of living] the quality of being possibly temporary. A person might say

"”I've been living in this apartment for ten years and I'm sick of paying rent. It's time for me to start looking at buying a house of my own

"”I've been living in my parents' house while I've been attending college. Now that I have my degree, I'm going to apply for jobs in another part of the country

Marilyn

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <Grammar Exchange 2>,

Thanks for replying!My doubt was about duration of time.If I could use both to say I do something during a time.If it is possible and correct to use both.

If all you want to express is the duration of time, "for ten years" is enough. Either the present perfect simple or the present perfect progressive is OK, since you've expressed the time period. The present perfect progressive calls attention to the duration of the action, however. With the verb "live," the difference is not great. with other verbs, the difference is greater. For ecxample

I've been trying to grow tomatoes each summer for several summers. Maybe this year I'll get lucky and have some good ones

"”I've tried to grow tomatoes each summer for several summers. i don't know whether I'll even try again; they haven't been very good

If there is no period of time specified, the present perfect progressive makes it clear that the activity may not have ended yet. For example

"”I've read the book you recommended; it was hard to read, but I liked it

"”I've been reading the book you recommended, but it's hard to read. I have to look up so many words!

Marilyn

This message has been edited. Last edited by: <Grammar Exchange 2>,