Hello Luiz, This "has/have been" structure is generally used when you're talking about a situation that started in the past, and is still true now. It can also be used to talk about something that has always/never been true. Instead of a huge grammar lesson, I will give a few more examples that I hope will give you a feel for it. Examples: We have been married for four years. = The wedding was four years ago, and we are still married. My mother has been sick for six months. = Six months ago, my mother got sick, and she is still sick now. My sister has been in the bathroom for half an hour, and I need to use the bathroom! = Half an hour ago, my sister went into the bathroom, and she is still there. This land has never been farmed. = There were no farms on this land before, and there is no farm now. This land has not been farmed for a year. = The land was being farmed in the past. A year ago, farming stopped, and now the land is still not being farmed. (You can add "now" to the end of the sentence like in your examples, but it is not really required since the verb tense already indicates you are talking about the situation now.) To help with similar verb tenses, here is the same sentence but with different verb tenses, so you can see the difference: I have been in Germany for two years. = Two years ago, I moved to Germany, and I am still in Germany. I was in Germany for two years = I moved to Germany, then moved out of Germany two years later. I am not there now. I had been in Germany for two years. = I moved to Germany, then two years later, something happened. Usually this type of sentence would have another part, because we expect that something happened at that time. Example: "I had been in Germany for two years when I met George." = I moved to Germany, then two years later, I met George (while still living in Germany). I hope this helps!

It's been over a year now and those lands still have not been conquered. This is a better way to say it. 'Being conquered' suggests the process of conquering is going on, someone is trying to conquer those lands and finding it difficult. "Those lands are no longer being conquered." "Those lands are not being conquered anymore." Both of these sentences suggest the action of conquering has ceased. The very first sentence of yours suggest conquering is still happening but has been resisted for over a year.

Bill has the correct interpretation. Here are some similar examples: - I have been sick for a week. (= I am sick now. I started being sick a week ago.) - I have not been well for a week. (= I am not well now. I started being not well a week ago.) - The enemy has been attacking for a year. (= The enemy is attacking now. They started attacking a year ago.) - The city has been resisting for a year. (= The city is resisting now. [described as a temporary condition] The city started resisted a year ago.) - The city has resisted for a year. (= The city resists now. [described as a permanent or long-term state] The city started resisting a year a ago.) - The city has been unconquered for a year. (= The city is unconquered now. The city resists now. The attack started a year ago. [The attack has been in progress since a year ago, so the city has been unconquered since a year ago.])

I think we use the structure "it's (been) + days / weeks / months / etc. + since clause" Those lands have been conquered for over a year It's been over a year since those lands were conquered