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

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 '18 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 '18 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.

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.