GPT가 적절하게 답하도록 적절하게 질문해봄ㅋㅋㅋ

Q:

I have lived in Canada for 10 years. I have been living in Canada for 10 years.

you may agree that those two sentences are natural.

At the same time, these two sentences have a difference. why do you suppose   "have lived" is more natural?

That does not happen naturally for Korean immigrants who have been living in another country for 10 years without any deliberate feedback. That does not happen naturally for Korean immigrants who have lived in another country for 10 years without any deliberate feedback.

A:

You're right to point out the difference between these two sentences. Both "I have lived in Canada for 10 years" and "I have been living in Canada for 10 years" can sound natural, but they are used in slightly different contexts.

Why "have lived" is more natural in the second sentence:

In the sentence:

"That does not happen naturally for Korean immigrants who have lived in another country for 10 years without any deliberate feedback."

"Have lived" is more natural because this sentence is referring to the completed experience of living in another country for 10 years. The focus is on the result or consequence of that experience (i.e., the 10 years spent in another country), rather than on the ongoing action of living. In this case, you're not focusing on the continuous action of living abroad, but rather on the fact that the person has spent 10 years living abroad, which is an experience that has already happened and is relevant to the statement.

Why "have been living" sounds less natural in this case:

If we use "have been living" here, like this:

"That does not happen naturally for Korean immigrants who have been living in another country for 10 years without any deliberate feedback."

The phrase "have been living" emphasizes that the action of living is ongoing and still happening. It would suggest that the immigrants are still living in the country right now, which might not be what you're trying to convey. The sentence sounds more focused on the continuous action rather than the completed experience of living abroad for a long period. It doesn't align with the intended meaning that the 10 years of living in another country are an experience that affects the immigrant’s situation, regardless of whether they’re still living there or not.

Conclusion:

"Have lived" is more natural here because the sentence is talking about the completed experience of having lived abroad for 10 years, not an ongoing process. The focus is on the past experience and how it impacts the immigrant's current situation, making it a more appropriate choice for this context.