I’m one of the (so far majority) who say that they are both grammatical, but mean slightly different things: “I’ve been playing…” implies a greater degree of continuity than “I’ve played…”. “I’ve played…” could be just a game here and there, while “I’ve been playing…” probably means most of the games in the season.
Though the difference is probably small, over a span of only two years.
“I’ve played” could also indicate it was a finite practice, whereas “I’ve been playing” (imperfect, or continuous) indicates something continuing, possibly up to the present (and likely into the future).
True; if I was on the JV squad, but just failed to make the cut for varsity, I might say “I’ve played for two years”, but I probably wouldn’t say “I’ve been playing for two years”.
Someone tells me something about the second-grade curriculum–“Kids at that age aren’t supposed to learn about place value”–that I think is wrong.
I challenge them, and they say, “Hey, I’ve been teaching second grade for two years!” as a way to establish their credibility. Their grammatical construction means that they’re currently teaching second grade.
I respond, “It’s been awhile, but I’ve taught second grade for three years,” as a way to establish my own credibility. My construction does not mean I’m currently teaching second grade.
Out of context, both are grammatical and acceptable. In a particular context they might convey different meanings. Note that everybody here has been adding context because no opinion about them is meaningful without that context.
That’s interesting because to me, the second one is perfectly grammatical but meaningless.
The way I see it, it implies that the action has been going on non-stop for the past 2 years, which is physically impossible. I’d only use the first one “in the real world”.
Interesting. In that case, I would say “I taught second grade for three years.” Simple past. To me, putting “have” in there means that you are still teaching, regardless of whether the verb form is “been teaching” or “taught.”
“Have” implies the present perfect progressive to me.
The second construction could have that meaning, except for the fact that that meaning is impossible. One must therefore interpret it in a way that is possible.
Of course, there are situations where what is possible, and therefore how one should interpret such a construction, are ambiguous. “I’ve been in this house for two years” could mean that I moved in two years ago, and have been going about normal business since then, or it could mean that I’ve been quarantining to an extreme and having food and other necessities delivered and working exclusively online.
Not at all. The second version is extremely common when describing an activity that is still ongoing (still routinely playing football). The first version is more ambiguous. If the speaker means that they played for two years but are no longer doing so, they should drop the “have”.
As I understand, in hyper-correct King’s English, the first sentence (a Present Perfect Simple) means: "At some point during my life so far, I spent two years playing football. (Implies that I stopped, at least as a regular activity, but also that I could resume the activity at some point in the future). The second sentence (a Present Perfect Continuous) implies that I started playing football 2 years ago, and haven’t stopped - am still playing it with some regularity.
In North American English, at least in spoken / vernacular dialects, the first sentence can indeed be more ambiguous.It may be used even if you haven’t stopped regularly playing football.
This is somewhat ambiguous. Since you were responding to @PatrickLondon’s “past imperect,” your use of progressive implies “past progressive”. I’d say your second sentence is better described as in the present perfect progressive tense, “A continuous activity that began in the past and continues into the present.” That’s completely legitimate grammatically and in the proper context.
Present Perfect Continuous is not given on Grammar Monster but other sites say that it is a synonym for Present Perfect Progressive, BTW, so I am agreeing with @themapleleaf.
Just what I was going to say. There may be a question about whether the guy who said “I’ve played” will continue to play, but less so about the “I’ve been playing” guy (though context will be a factor as always with language).
Speaking very strictly no two linguistic constructions mean exactly the same thing. But those two phrases are so close I ignored any slight aromas, and said they are the same.
The first one (“I’ve played”) is a slightly better substitute for “I played football for two years”, but if that’s what you mean to say then just say that.