1

Are the following sentences correct? and what is the difference in meaning?

  • I had been studying for over 3 years before I reached to level B.
  • I had been studied for over 3 years before I reached to level B.
  • I studied more than 3 years before I reached to level B.
  • 2
    What are your own thoughts about these sentences? Sharing them would provide a good starting point for an answer. – CowperKettle Feb 19 '17 at 11:56
  • I think it should be for more than 3 years – user178049 Feb 19 '17 at 11:57
  • 1
    It's a bit unclear which part of the sentences you're asking about, but there is no need for the preposition "to" after "reached" in any of them. – MadGab Feb 19 '17 at 13:28
1

In the first sentence you use a present participle: some people also call it an active participle. You use it to talking about something that you are doing.

I had been studying maths - I am doing the studying

The second sentence uses a past participle: some people call it a passive participle. You use it to talk about something that is being done to you.

I had been studied by scientists - the scientists are studying me

This is probably not the meaning that you intend, so let's rule out sentence 2.

Sentence 1 is past perfect continuous: it says that you were doing something for a period of time (three years) before some event in the past (reaching level B).

Sentence 3 is past simple: you did something for an unspecified period of time, and you completed it three years before you reached level B.

Sentence 1 is closer to what you probably meant, but there is no real need to use past perfect continuous: you could just change sentence 3 from simple past to past continuous and add a for:

I was studying for more than three years before I reached level B

Note that the to after reached is not required.

3

I had been studying for over 3 years before I reached to level B.

Reach is used transtively here, it'd be wrong if you put the preposition(to) after the verb. The use of had been(past perfect) is optional because "before" already marks the sequence of the events.

I had been studied for over 3 years before I reached to level B.

Again, the preposition should be removed. "I had been studied" is a passive contruction, it would mean "you were studied by someone", which is quite nonsensical.

I studied more than 3 years before I reached to level B.

You need to add for before "more than 3 years" , I'm not sure why you need to do so, maybe because for is usually used to indicate a period. Because it's a long period, the progressive form would fit better "I was studying. . . ", but there's no "should" here, it's still OK to use the simple form.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.