There is a subtle difference in connotations.
The first sentence suggests continuing, and the second sentence suggests competition.
"Already" is a tricky one to parse. To borrow Kate's sentence "I've been to Spain five times already", it means very different things when you just told me you're going to Spain or Italy.
I think already carries the implication that you expect to have the experience again, or that having had it is a reason for not needing to have it again.
The pharmacy supplied me with twenty tablets, and I've already taken five.
I had a lovely holiday in Spain. I've been there five times now.
I think I shall go to Italy next year. I've been to Spain five ...
"I didn't have a tablet before." Means that before you won a tablet, you did not have one (at that time). I.E. In this case it is possible that you had owned one in the past, but did not at the time that you won one.
"I haven't had a tablet before." Means that you did not ever own a tablet before winning the tablet.
They could apply to exactly the same circumstances; but they have different implications.
I didn't have a tablet before says that just before winning it, I didn't have one. I might have had one a while ago.
I haven't had a tablet before suggests that I have never had a tablet. More precisely, it says that over some relevant period extending up to the ...
Both tried and has tried are perfectly correct. The simple past tried emphasizes the completed nature of the action. The present perfect emphasizes the relationship of the action to the current situation. In practice there is not much difference between them in this context.
There is a slight distinction.
"I have been waiting" -> Means that the speaker has continuously been waiting on you since two hours ago
"I have waited" -> Means that the speaker at some point in the past waited on you for two hours
Here, "I have been waiting" is most appropriate, as presumably, they have been waiting ...
"I am sent" an old-fashioned if not obsolete form. It suggests to me a biblical or other religious text, and not a recent one:
I am sent to bring salvation.
Do not use this form for everyday meanings.
The usual form would be the simple past:
I was sent by Ory.
I have been sent by Ory.
is a bit more formal and in my view does not flow ...
I am is the present simple form. you can't use it. Because, someone has sent you. The action sending started in the past and The result sending is still happening now.
If you want to use "I" then you should use I was sent. past simple passive.
I have been sent is ok. It present perfect passive
It would be great if you would not be here around for a while.
No, that is not correct. First of all let's switch two words:
It would be great if you would not be around here for a while.
That is doable but awkward. Better would be:
It would be great if you would not hang around here for a while.
The problem is that the verb 'be' is not usually seen as ...
No, past perfect continuous will not be used here.
In order to use past perfect continuous, you have to review something happened before a time in the past, in other words, the past of past. Thus, normally you can decide whether you should use past perfect continuous by finding past tense in the sentence. The following situation, for example, can use the ...
Well, if you accept the definition the dictionaries give of AGO, like for example Merriam-Webster:
earlier than the present time (that is, earlier than NOW, the time of speech),
then your expression of time five months ago is very definite.
So your sentence should be:
Five months ago (which is in August 2020), I decided to learn (how) to play the piano. (...
"I have always wanted this book" is correct. You wanted the book, and you still want the book, so you are pleased to have received the book.
The alternative option you present would be used in a sentence like "I had always wanted the book but now I find it brings me no joy" to indicate that you did want it but you don't want it now.
Have you seen John lately?
No, I haven't seen him for five years. Why, is he back in town?
When I was in Spain last year, someone tapped me on the shoulder. I turned round - it was John! I hadn't seen him for ten years. I see him regularly now.
"had" is past tense.
If you're responding to the offer for the first time, the first sentence is what you want. You read the document (past tense) and you're telling the recipient that, having done so, you are now accepting the offer (present tense).
If somehow your acceptance got lost and you're asked about it, you could use the second sentence (or the third, but the second is ...
If you have spoken to your colleague about this email, or if your colleague is expecting this email as a recipient, I would just say:
I have just sent the email.
Since your colleague is one of the recipients, it may be awkward to say "I have just sent them the email." However, if your main intention is to send them this email, and you just want ...
In both cases, your first example use present/past perfect. This form is common in certain European languages to indicate simple past.
Example: When translating to French, both phrases "I ate my lunch" and "I have eaten my lunch" become "J'ai mangé mon déjeuner". So, there is a distinction in English where there is none in ...
Over on the English Language and Usage (EL&U) StackExchange, we are coming to a consensus that a related construction is at least marginally acceptable. The link to that question is here, but, for completeness, I will now reproduce my full answer to the EL&U question.
(I should stress, however, that I agree with the other answers here that
The sentence "What you've been doing" is in form of a noun clause. For example, you can use it in the sentences that are like the following: "What you've been doing is interesting to me."
But if you want to use it as a question, you should say: "What have you been doing?"
The correct way to ask someone about their recent activities is "What have you been doing?".
However, if you were to ask somebody that, but they didn't hear you, and then they asked me what you said, I might use indirect speech and tell them, "He asked what you've been doing". This would not be me asking them a question, but me using ...
You are making it hard by trying to combine three time periods "three hours", "before bed", and "three years".
If you are finding that tense is confusing, then probably you need to rephrase:
For the last three years, I have spent three hours before bed each evening learning English.
The introduction of the verb "spend&...
The past simple just talks about a past event, whereas the present perfect talks about a past event which is having an effect on the present. Saying your device was repaired only really says something about what happened in the past - it might still be repaired at the current time, or maybe it's broken again, but the past simple doesn't really imply anything ...
I think you are conflating present perfect progressive/continuous with present perfect.
In present perfect progressive/continuous, "has been" is followed by an -ing verb.
He has been running.
In your sentence however, "repaired" should be viewed as an adjective, so your sentence has the present perfect form of "to be."
Develop is a verb that is "ergative". This means that there are two senses, one is transitive and one is intransitive.
Another ergative verb is "to open". We can say
The door opens (intransitive ergative)
John opens the door (transitive)
The door is opened (transitive passive)
Note the similarity between transitive-passive and ...
When talking about a specific occasion, the simple past often sounds more natural and is less ambiguous. So instead of "Have you been there with your siblings?" one could ask:
Did you go there with yoru siblings
Did your siblings join you on the trip?
Instead of "How long have you been there?" one could ask:
How long were you ...
Not quite: it's not as simple as you're thinking, unfortunately.
When you use the present perfect ("have had"), you are choosing to present the events as having some present relevance. When you use the simple past ("had"), you are choosing to present the events as being complete in the past.
Your choice does not necessarily depend on the ...
If you want to emphasize the continuity of the action, "has not been taking" is clearly better than "has taken".
If you expect to continue this arrangement, though, you might use
"I hope it is not taking too much of your spare time".
I believe that's the present continuous tense, sometimes called present imperfect. Regardless it ...