He studied painting from 1990.

[giddyman]

Hello, teachers.

He studied painting from 1990.
He has studied painting since 1990.

Do they mean the same?
Sorry. No context.

 

[5jj]

Sorry. No context.

I assume you mean that you wrote them. Am I right?

 

[giddyman]

I assume you mean that you wrote them. Am I right?

I found the first one in a dictionary. The second one is mine.

 

[White Hat]

He studied painting from 1990.

I think the use of 'from' will be OK here if after '1990' you use 'to' followed by another year (e.g., 'from 1990 to 1994'). You could also say 'He studied painting starting in 1990'. Here's an example from the Internet: 'Mr. Griesbach was born in Fort Qu’Appelle, Saskatchewan on January 3, 1878. He was the son of Col. Henry Arthur Griesbach. He was educated in preparatory school and graduated St. John’s College in Winnipeg in 1895. Came to Edmonton that same year. Studied law starting in 1895 and was admitted to the bar in 1900 and became Kings Council in 1918'.

 

[5jj]

He studied painting from 1990.
He has studied painting since 1990.

Both tell us that he started his studying in 1990.
The first does not tell us when he finished. The second suggests he is still studying,

 

[5jj]

I think the use of 'from' will be OK here if after '1990' you use 'to' followed by another year (e.g., 'from 1990 to 1994'). You could also say 'He studied painting starting in 1990'. Here's an example from the Internet: 'Mr. Griesbach was born in Fort Qu’Appelle, Saskatchewan on January 3, 1878. He was the son of Col. Henry Arthur Griesbach. He was educated in preparatory school and graduated St. John’s College in Winnipeg in 1895. Came to Edmonton that same year. Studied law starting in 1895 and was admitted to the bar in 1900 and became Kings Council in 1918'.
'

It is not essential to use to with a later year.

 

[Barque]

No context.

I found the first one in a dictionary.

The entry in the dictionary that sentence was used to illustrate is the context.

The second one is mine.

What you mean or want to say is the context.

 

[emsr2d2]

You should have provided a link to, or a screenshot of, the relevant dictionary entry. Please do so now.

 

[giddyman]

You should have provided a link to, or a screenshot of, the relevant dictionary entry. Please do so now.

Yes, sir!

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/from

 

[Tarheel]

@giddyman "She studied painting from 1926" right?

Ron went to high school from 1964 to 1968.

He lived in St. Louis from 1990 to 1999.

He worked as a carpenter from 1950 to 1990.

He was married from 1983 to 2013.

Daylight lasts from dawn to dusk

 

[emsr2d2]

Yes, sir!

Don't refer to users here as "Sir". It is overly formal and suggests you think we're all male. We're not.

 

[Michaelll]

1. He studied painting from 1990.
2. He has studied painting since 1990.

Do they mean the same?

As far as I understand the difference, they differ in the way that the first speaks of a complete period of time, while the second speaks of a period of time that extends until now (incomplete/unfinished).

Some examples:

• He looked/was looking after them after he moved there. (either he's dead or he just doesn't bother anymore)
• He's been looking after them ever since he moved there. (until now)
  
  
• He didn't do that from the age of ten. (until another moment in the past, maybe his death)
• He hasn't done that since he was ten. (until now)
  
  
• She went to his grave every weekend from 1983. (either she's dead or she just doesn't go there anymore)
• She's gone to his grave every weekend since 1983. (until now)

Both tell us that he started his studying in 1990.
The first does not tell us when he finished. The second suggests he is still studying.

Thanks!

 

[5jj]

As far as I understand the difference, they differ in the way that the first speaks of a complete period of time,

It doesn't. It tells us about the starting point.

He looked/was looking after them after he moved there. (either he's dead or he just doesn't bother anymore)

We don't know that.

• He didn't do that from the age of ten. (until another moment in the past, maybe his death)

We don't know that.

• She went to his grave every weekend from 1983. (either she's dead or she just doesn't go there anymore)

We don't know that.

 

[Michaelll]

As far as I understand the difference, they differ in the way that the first speaks of a complete period of time,

It doesn't. It tells us about the starting point.

I meant that if we know the person isn't doing it any longer (maybe, because he's dead) we can't use the present perfect option with 'since' - "He has studied painting since 1990" and that should be the one with 'from' - "He studied painting from 1990", because the period is finished/complete.

If we know the person is alive and the period isn't finished yet:

• He's been looking after them ever since he moved there. (until now)
• He hasn't done that since he was ten. (until now)
• She's gone to his grave every weekend since 1983. (until now)

If we know that the period is finished:

• He looked/was looking after them after he moved there. (either he's dead or he just doesn't bother anymore)
• He didn't do that from the age of ten. (until another moment in the past, maybe his death)
• She went to his grave every weekend from 1983. (either she's dead or she just doesn't go there anymore)

 

[5jj]

I meant that if we know the person isn't doing it any longer (maybe, because he's dead) we can't use the present perfect option with 'since' - "He has studied painting since 1990" and that should be the one with 'from' - "He studied painting from 1990", because the period is finished/complete.

Correct.