Context: My friend's come to visit me and I am showing him my new country house (which I am still working on in my free time, haven't finished it yet)
As far as I understand,
I've worked on this house for 2 years
I've been working on this house for 2 years
are practically interchangeable with little difference in meaning. However, if we replace "to work on" with "to build" only the 2nd sentence (i.e. I've been building) will be acceptable
From my understanding, we can't say "I've built my house for 2 years" because "build" is a resultative verb (has a final goal and can be completed, unlike "to work") and will be interpreted as a completed action (i.e. "I started and finished building and I have a house now") which is incompatible with the duration ("for 2 years").
1.Could you please tell me if my explanation is correct?
- Could you also comment on the following examples and tell me if my understanding of the logic behind them is right :
I've fixed my car for 2 years
(probably an incorrect sentence. "fix" is a resulative verb, thus it should be changed to "I've been fixing". However,
"I've fixed cars for 2 years"
is correct because plural ("cars") suggests repetitivenes/regular nature of the action, thus making the sentence be interpreted in a correct way. (I started 2 years ago and I'm still doing this job) Although we still can change it into "I've been fixing", we don't have to.
I've played tennis for 3 days
(might be grey area? verb "play" is not resultative, however, the duration might be too short (3 days), thus, it's better to change it into "I've been playing")
I am eager to hear your thoughts on this. Thank you