Yes, that's perfectly fine and natural. There's a slight difference in what it emphasizes, just like you said. "What have you done" emphasizes that one important thing in particular may have been done, "what have you been doing" emphasizes the actions over time that they may have been taking.
In addition to Colin's answer I would add:
Did you do/have something..... is more likely in a follow-up question
or as part of a continuing conversation.
A: >I spotted a bear near the top of the mountain last week.
B: >Did you really climb the mountain?
A: >No, I took the cable car!
Or, it is used in posing a question about a particular event:
In my (British) English, both are pefectly good, and usable in exactly the same situations. The difference is in how the speaker is choosing to structure the temporal relationships: in the first they are choosing to treat "having a holiday" as an event complete in the past. In the second they are choosing to treat "having a holiday" as ...
Saying "I have played a lot today" with a tone suggesting that you did not expect to play so much or you played more than how much you normally play could indicate that you don't intend to play anymore.
Without the tone, both the statements do not give any hint of whether you will play later in the day.
He has been tired to study.
This is currently ungrammatical. It could be rewritten as either:
a. He has been too tired to study.
Meaning, he cannot study because he is overly tired. Tired in this case is acting as an adjective, and the present perfect form of "to be" ("has been") is the verb. (see Note 3)
b. He has been tired by ...
Very often, if you can use a continuous construction, you can also use a simple construction: the difference is not in the objective circumstances or events, but entirely in how the speaker is choosing to think about the events: as a completed or a continuing activity.
In the question What xxx since you left school?, both options are completely natural.
They could be slightly modified to make some sense
1 I learned English for 2 years
this would sound fine if followed by another phrase
I learned English for 2 years but then I stopped
2 I learned English in 2 years
This would make some sense if it referred to some standard
I learned English to level B2 in 2 years
The other two are more problematic
that are not deleted = undeleted
records that are not deleted = semantically, undeleted records
food that is not eaten = uneaten food
cards that are not played = unplayed cards
people who are not seen = unseen people
The system has old, undeleted records.
undelete is a computing term.
That is not a passive construction. It is adjectival.
The system ...
"Has gone" is somewhat more idiomatic here. The distinction is that "has gone" only states that the event existed, whereas "went" focuses on the specific day when the event happened. Here are some clearer examples:
"What's your fastest time in the mile?" "I've run it as fast as 4:37."
"What's your ...
We do not know if the statement is bound by time / event. Meaning, somebody may prove it was not written by the author by now, which is less likely but is possible going by the structure of the sentence. So it is to be mentioned in simple tense and not in perfect. Whether it is in present-simple or past-simple is a difficult thing to say but present-simple ...
Green_ideas is correct. “Went” is clear, understandable and correct.
He failed, left, and went. All the same tense. All in the correct order of time.
He failed, left, and has gone. Change of tense, all in the correct order of time. The change of tense merely gives a slight feeling of contrast between his academic record and his entering the book of records. ...
**Watch how this typically works:
Person One: Have you been to London before? [You are still there, and no one cares when you got there.]
Person Two: Yes, I've been here before.
Person One: Really? When did you come to London before?
Person Two: I came to London last year.
Notice the switch from present perfect to simple past above. That is a ...
Your three questions using the perfect all have an implied "on any of your visits".
So "Have you been there with your siblings?" means "Was there at least one occasion when you were there with your siblings, irrespective of any times that you were there without your siblings?"
Similarly, "Have you lived there in a dormitory&...
They are both usable in standard American dialect, but they mean slightly different things:
been frequently angered
Here 'frequently' modified 'angered', and thus emphasizes the anger.
frequently been angered
Here frequently modifies the state of 'being angered' and thus emphasizes the process a bit more.
We have always helped each other and we’ll keep helping each other
The first part of the sentence refers to something that has occurred in the past up to this point in time. The second part of the sentence talks about a commitment into the future, from this point onwards.
We always help each other and we will keep helping each other
Here, the first part of ...
The form "I am glad..." would apply if she is still teaching you.
The form "I am glad to have been..." would apply if she is no longer teaching you.
It might be more idiomatic to say
"I am glad [ to have you / to have had you ] as my teacher."
The first is odd. Normally ‘have been’ is used for repeated actions: “I have been to London twice”. This means that at this time I am in the state of having been there twice.
It is used less often for a state of being, again usually for more than one thing: “I have been a nurse and a missionary, I now do construction.”
However it is not used for a one time ...
David had a nice car means simply that, at the time of which we are speaking, he was in possession of that car. That would be a natural thing to say.
If we were to say David has had the measles, it would mean that he has, in the past, caught that illness (but he may have long since recovered).
So we might say David has had nice cars [in the past], but I don'...
"He has had a nice car" is normally interpreted as an experiential perfect.
The event or state is expressed as an experience which happened at least once, without respect to a particular location in time, and which is repeatable. (SIL Glossary).
We use the past tense when the proposition expressed is no longer true in the present, so "He had ...
have debated suggests, though not strongly, that the debate has finished, and a conclusion reached.
have been debating is the opposite - it implies that the debate has NOT concluded, and that there has not yet been agreement on the outcome.
Does it affect the present
When the present is completed, it means that the action occurred in the past, but it is related to the present, that is, an action that occurred in the past to explain the current situation, and it still has a certain impact on the present.
The past completion is only suitable for the actions that have been completed before a ...
The first pair of sentences:
He was a good guitarist. He'd been playing since childhood.
He's a good guitarist. He's been playing since childhood.
The first sentence speaks of someone who isn't a good guitarist any more, maybe because he is dead, because "was" is in past tense. The second speaks of a living person who is still a good guitarist.