Could you please tell me the difference between the two following sentences? When do I use the first one and when do I use the second one? Are both of them correct?

  1. I haven't been travelling for 3 years
  2. I haven't travelled for 3 years

2 Answers 2


Grammatically both of them are correct. However, in negative sentences

2. I haven't travelled for 3 years

sounds more natural (or, on the contrary (1) sounds unnatural).

There's no need to use a progressive tense to describe something that you didn't do.

  • Thanks. But what's the difference betwen them? May 7, 2018 at 6:20
  • The difference is that (2) sounds more natural to talk about things that you haven't done for a period of time. May 7, 2018 at 9:44

I agree with Serge, but you could say "I haven't been travelling for 3 years, only for 1 year" as an answer to the question: "Have you been travelling for 3 years?" or if someone says: "I heard you have been travelling for 3 years" and you want to convey that you haven't.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .