0

An example from Burlington English - Choose the correct answer

He has been/ has gone to the village to see his grandmother.

The correct answer is 'has gone.' Why is 'has been' incorrect here ?

I know the difference between 'has been' and 'has gone '.

He has been to Japan. = He has visited Japan .(and has already come back).

He has gone to Japan. = He is visiting Japan. (and is still there).

Now if I want to say in the above example that he visited his grandmother and has already come back. Is it correct to say -

He went to the village to see his grandmother.

Another sentence

He went (not 'has been') to the market to buy vegetables.

Improve this question
3
  • Does this answer your question? Using have gone to / been to / been in
    – Lambie
    Commented May 17 at 12:23
  • What difference is it that you say you know between has been and has gone? Who says has been is wrong here?
    – Paul Tanenbaum
    Commented May 17 at 12:44
  • As per the book 'has been' means= not at the place visited. while 'has gone ' means the person has not returned and in the exercise only 'has gone ' is the correct answer. Hence my query.
    – James Mathai
    Commented May 17 at 13:49

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

Without context, either might be correct

Your suggestions are mostly right but also slightly wrong. “Been” and “gone” are past participles of the verbs “be” and “go” so the emphasis is different.

The verb “be” denotes a state of existence. “He is in his village” would be the simple present tense of “He has been in his village”.

The verb “go” denotes travel. “He goes to his village” would be the simple present tense of “He has gone to his village”.

In the present tense, they are very different. But in the past tense they are almost but not quite the same.

“He has been …” means that at some time in the past he was definitely there but his present whereabouts are unknown - he might still be there, he might be somewhere else.

“He has gone …” means that at some time in the past he was travelling towards but his present whereabouts are unknown. He might still be in transit towards, he might have arrived and still be there, he might have arrived and departed, and, less likely, he might have travelled towards but have gone somewhere else.

With “been” the emphasis is on his pre sense in his village in the past, with “gone” the emphasis is on his travel towards his village in the past. In many situations, it’s a distinction without a difference but in some it might matter.

So, to repeat the headline ,either might be correct depending on context.

Improve this answer
2
  • Explanation in the book 1. have been to/have gone to are the present perfect forms that are commonly used to refer to movement to another place. 2. has/have been to It is used to refer to a place that someone has visited at some time in their life. It refers to an experience that involves travel. it indicates that the person has returned or is no longer there. Mia has been to France. (She is no longer in France.) has/have gone to It is used to refer to a person who has gone to a place but has not yet returned. Mia has gone to France. (She's still in France.)
    – James Mathai
    Commented May 17 at 13:51
  • I agree with what your book says. We would be more likely to use he went to when we say exactly when the journey took place (last week, yesterday, this morning...) and he has been to when the time-scale is more vague.
    – Kate Bunting
    Commented May 17 at 18:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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