"since ... ago"

[Freeguy]

I have a question about a grammar point, not covered in any grammar-related book, that is difficult for non-native English speakers. I would be so grateful if you could briefly explain why the following sentences are correct or incorrect:

1. I haven’t seen Ali since two minutes ago.
2. I haven't been to London since two years ago.

Specifically, my question is about the construction of “since ... ago”, which many English teachers in my country believe is correct. They say a continuative perfective describes a situation that started somewhere in the past but continues into the present and, probably, beyond. That is the case here. Such a continuative perfective may, but need not, be accompanied by an adjunct introduced by “since”:

Subject — Continuative Perfective — “since” [starting point in time].”

The continuation is expressed in the “since,” and “two years ago” or “two minutes ago” is as good a starting point as any.

However, I believe that native English speakers would not use this construction but, rather, would follow “since” with a specific point in time such as a year, an exact date or a reference to an event. “Two years ago” is a period of time, not a specific point in time. To make my case, I need solid justification. Maybe it is a question of idiom rather than grammar. I know that spoken English can be either formal and structured or casual and informally structured, and I tend to prefer an approach that follows a formal structure without excluding informal and slang usage, where relevant.

P.S: I do know that there is nothing wrong with “I have gone to school since 2009, ten years ago”. Syntactically, it is different from the sentences #1 and #2, in that “since” and “ago” are now in different phrases: “ago” has been shifted to an afterthought. But in the sentences #1 and #2, “since” indicates a period beginning in the past and continuing into the present. Whereas “ago” concentrates on that beginning in the past. It is this that makes the construction uncomfortable: one word highlights the continuation, another focuses on the past.

(Source: Not specific. These kinds of sentences are made up in a multiple-choice mock exam held in Iran for those who want to sit university entrance exams)

Thank you.

 

[Glizdka]

Not a teacher
------
Hello, Freeguy!

I've seen "...since period of time ago" a few times, and it always felt odd.

From what I've heard from students, it is advised by English teachers in my country as an easy way out of the common learner error "...since period of time". Like when you catch yourself saying "I've been working at name of company since five years," remember it's a mistake, and just add "...ago" as a nice patchy solution.

I always felt it was better to just rephrase it to "...for five years", but it does seem kind of convincing. I don't know what to think of it. I'm joining your question.

 

[jutfrank]

“Two years ago” is a period of time, not a specific point in time.

No, it isn't. It's a specific point in time.

in the sentences #1 and #2, “since” indicates a period beginning in the past and continuing into the present. Whereas “ago” concentrates on that beginning in the past. It is this that makes the construction uncomfortable: one word highlights the continuation, another focuses on the past.

The time frame is a period starting from a point in time (two years ago) leading up to the present moment.

Both sentences are grammatical. However, a native speaker is more likely to use the time expression ... for two years.