I heard someone knock/knocking on the door.

[tzfujimino]

1. I heard the bomb explode.:tickThe "bomb" is in the singular - the bomb exploded only once.)
2. I heard the bomb exploding.:cross:
3. I heard the bombs exploding.:tickThe "bombs" is in the plural - several/many bombs were exploding here and there.)

Do I understand the matter correctly?

 

[Eckaslike]

1. I heard the bomb explode.:tickThe "bomb" is in the singular - the bomb exploded only once.)
2. I heard the bomb exploding.:cross:
3. I heard the bombs exploding.:tickThe "bombs" is in the plural - several/many bombs were exploding here and there.)

Do I understand the matter correctly?

I think you are right.

To me, 2) doesn't work because by its nature a bomb explodes very quickly and is then over. However, the word "exploding" means a continuous action. The conflict is that something was over very quickly, but also continuously. I suppose if it were a certain kind of bomb, like a nuclear bomb with a massive explosion that went on for a while, then it might work.

3. I agree this works because the bombs could go off as a series of explosions over a period of time.

1. I agree. The bomb explodes and is over in a short period of time.

 

[tzfujimino]

1. I heard the baby crying.:tick:
2. I heard the baby cry.:?:
3. I saw the children playing outside.:tick:
4. I saw the children play outside.:?:

#2 and #4 look grammatical, but I'm not sure if they sound natural or not. Are they O.K?

Thank you for your patience.

 

[Matthew Wai]

'I can hear somebody calling my name intermittently'.

That is not incorrect, but I do not think it is something many native speakers would naturally say.

Then how would native speakers naturally say?

 

[Rover_KE]

'I can hear someone calling my name every so often.'

 

[Eckaslike]

or, "I can hear someone calling my name every now and again."

 

[Eckaslike]

1. I heard the baby crying.:tick:
2. I heard the baby cry.:?:
3. I saw the children playing outside.:tick:
4. I saw the children play outside.:?:

#2 and #4 look grammatical, but I'm not sure if they sound natural or not. Are they O.K?

Thank you for your patience.

Others may feel differently about this, but they all seem fine to me.
1. I heard the baby crying and it might have carried on for a while.
2. I heard the baby cry, possibly just once [as in to cry out], or more briefly than in sentence 1.
3. I saw the children playing outside for a period of time.
4. I saw the children play outside more briefly than in sentence 3. To be honest, to me, the difference between sentences 3 and 4 is very subtle. We might say "Watch the children play", which essentially means "Watch the children playing".

I think the context drives the sentence used. Is the action to be described continuous? If so, then use the continuous form. If less frequent, or a one off action, use the short form.

So, a baby can cry continuously or just once or twice. However, children tend to play as a continuous action, rather than just throw the ball up in the air once and then stop. I think that is why my mind seems to automatically convert "play" into "playing" in this context.

 

[tzfujimino]

I really appreciate your help, Eckaslike.:-D

Would you mind my asking you one more question?

1. I heard the bombs exploding.
2. I heard the bombs explode.

I think both of these sentences are correct.
Do they mean the same to you? (I suspect so.)
I feel the focus is more on the ongoing explosions in #1 while it is more on the whole (completed/finished) accident/incident in #2.

Thank you again.

 

[Eckaslike]

You're welcome tzfujimino.

I see them in exactly the same way as you have described.

1. More continuous.
2. More complete, as if the bombs all went of at the same time, or within a few seconds of each other.