Thanks for spotting that. I didn’t intend to put this pattern but, fortunately,

• Has/have) + subject + not + been + (verb1+ing) + object + modifier?

also exists. It’s a very formal yes/no question when the question per se is in a negative form.

1. Have you NOT been living in this house for nine years? (Bukankah kamu telah tinggal di rumah ini selama 9 tahun?).
2. Have we NOT been studying English for a month? (Bukankah kita telah belajar bahasa Inggris selama 1 bulan?).
3. Has he NOT been marrying her for nineteen years? (Bukankah dia telah mengawininya selama 19 tahun?).
   
4. Has Mr. Johnson NOT been working in the same place since 1980? (Bukankah pak Johnson telah bekerja di tempat yang sama sejak tahun 1980?).
5. Has she NOT been waiting for her boyfriend for an hour? (Bukankah dia telah menunggu pacarnya selama satu jam?).

A less formal pattern for this one but it’s more frequently used is:

• Has/have) + NOT + subject + been + (verb1+ing) + object + modifier?

1. Haven’t you been living in this house for nine years? (Bukankah kamu telah tinggal di rumah ini selama 9 tahun?).
   
2. Haven’t we been studying English for a month? (Bukankah kita telah belajar bahasa Inggris selama 1 bulan?).
3. Hasn’t he been marrying her for nineteen years? (Bukankah dia telah mengawininya selama 19 tahun?).
4. Hasn’t Mr. Johnson been working in the same place since 1980? (Bukankah pak Johnson telah bekerja di tempat yang sama sejak tahun 1980?).
5. Has she NOT been waiting for her boyfriend for an hour? (Bukankah dia telah menunggu pacarnya selama satu jam?).

BUT, since the examples provided in the article are in positive forms, therefore, in order not to cause questions like yours to reappear, then we should change the formula to:

• (Has/have) + subject + been + (verb1+ing) + object + modifier?

Thanks again.

Saya mulai dari kalimat aktifnya dulu:

Vita TELAH SEDANG MEMINJAM sepedaku.

NOTE: verb borrow (meminjam) kurang pas kalau, misalnya, action meminjam sepeda hanya sekali dilakukan oleh Vita, walaupun sepeda tersebut masih digunakan olehnya sampai sekarang. Why? Karena action dari verb ini hanya berlangsung singkat, yaitu pada saat meminta tolong untuk dipinjami (saat ngomong). Konteks seperti ini, lebih tepat kalau kita expresikan dengan menggunakan present perfect tense:

Vita has borrowed my bicycle.

Oleh karena itu, agar nyambung dengan penggunaan tensis present perfect continuous, saya gunakan verb use (= memakai/menggunakan):

Vita has been using my bicycle.

karena secara implisit meminjam sesuatu adalah untuk digunakan, bukan?

BUT, jika, misalnya, Vita rutin meminjam sepeda tersebut (Hari Minggu lalu, Senin lalu, Selasa lalu, dst sampai sekarang rutinitas peminjaman masih dilakukan oleh Vita), barulah nyambung kalau kita gunakan present perfect atau present perfect continuous tense:

Vita has borrowed my bicycle.

OR:

Vita has been borrowing my bicycle.

Kembali ke pertanyaan awal:

Sepedaku TELAH SEDANG DIGUNAKAN oleh Vita.

English dari kalimat pasif ini kurang lebih adalah:

My bicycle has been being used by Vita.

Moga membantu, but don’t hesitate to discuss it further if you’re confused with what I say.

I don’t know what to say, except “that’s the way it is“.
Although it is written:

While + present continuous tense,

the action in this sub-clause (functioning as modifier of time) will be occurring simultaneously with that in the main clause.

I am going on a dream vacation to Tahiti. While you 1… (do) paperwork and 2… (talk) to annoying customers on the phone, I 3… (lie) on a sunny, tropical beach. Are you jealous?

When I got the answer, I surprised that the answer number 1 and 2 is in present continuous but number 3 is in future continuous. Why ? Would you explain it?

In addition to this, bule also use the present perfect tense pattern to express a present time activity.

Example:

1. I’ve got to go now = I must go now = I have to go now.
2. She’s got to study harder = She must study harder = She has to study harder.

They also use the present continuous pattern to express a planned future activity.
Example:

1. I am going to Jakarta next Monday = I am going to go to Jakarta next Monday.
2. They are leaving for Bali this weekend = They are going to leave for Bali this weekend.

And, there are many more inconsistencies like these in English.

I’m afraid, NO. It’s not like that. This sentence follows the following pattern:

S V (that) S V prep. pronoun.

This pattern almost exactly the same as my sentence above.

I hope (that) this question is not your last one.

Here, “(that) S V prep. pronoun” is a noun clause, so the sentence in question actually uses,

S V O

However, if your sentence were like the following,

I am thinking of my question like that.

the pattern it follows would be as follows,

S V O adv. pronoun.