[Grammar] A little reflection will tell/would have told him that he ...

[inase]

Hello,

I am wondering if the following sentences are correct and are used in daily conversations. If they are, please let me know the contextual differences and nuances.

1. A little reflection will tell him that he is not seeing things as they are.
2. A little reflection will tell him that he does not see things as they are.
3. A little reflection will tell him that he is not looking at things as they are.
4. A little reflection will tell him that he does not look at things as they are.
5. A little reflection will tell him that he is being too obstinate.
6. A little reflection will tell him that he made a mistake.
7. A little reflection would have told him that he had not been seeing things as they had been.
8. A little reflection would have told him that he had not seen things as they had been.
9. A little reflection will tell him that he refuses to look at things as they are.

Best regards,
Inase

 

[bhaisahab]

They are all grammatically correct, but I think they are a bit too wordy/formal to be natural in everyday conversation.

 

[inase]

1. A little reflection will tell (a) him that he is not (f) seeing (b)(c) (d) things as they are(c).
2. A little reflection will tell (a) him that he does not (f) see (b) (c) (d) things as they are (c) (e).
3. A little reflection will tell (a) him that he is not (f) looking (b) (c) (d) at things as they are (c) (e).
4. A little reflection will tell (a)him that he does not (f) look (b) (c) (d) at things as they are (c) (e).
5. A little reflection will tell (a) him that he is being (b) (c) too obstinate(e) (f).
6. A little reflection will tell (a)him that he made (b)(c) a mistake (e) (f)
7. A little reflection would have told (a) him that he had not (f) been seeing (b) (c) (d) things as they had been (c) (e).
8. A little reflection would have told (a) him that he had not (f) seen (b) (c) (d) things as they had been (c) (e).
9. A little reflection will tell him (a)that he refuses (f) to look at (d)things as they are (c) (e).

There are far too many contrasting ideas in those sentences for us to be able to discuss all the nuances in one post, or even in one thread. Concentrate on one contrast at a time from this list:

(a) will tell vs would tell vs would have told
(b) simple vs progressive(c) present vs past vs past perfect(d) see vs look at
(e) SEE things as they BE vs BE too obstinate vs MAKE a mistake
(f) negation by not vs negation by semantic content

Thank you for your advice. Let me first focus on Sentences 1 and 2. Is there any difference in nuance between the two: progressive and non-progressive in the sub clause?

 

[inase]

Thank you! Does it apply to the difference between 3 and 4? The reason I ask this question is that "see" and "look at" are different in that the former does not usually make a progressive form while the latter does.

 

[andrewg927]

The reason I ask this question is that "see" and "look at" are different in that the former does not usually make a progressive form while the latter does.

Where did you learn this?

 

[inase]

Where did you learn this?

Is "where" important?
"See" usually means a state like "think" and "look at" an action like "watch."

 

[andrewg927]

In your sentence, 'see' has a meaning similar to regard, consider, hold/form an opinion about. This has a more dynamic sense the the receptive sense of receiving an impression through your eyes, and the progressive aspect is possible.

OK. Like I see. In that context you don't use I'm seeing. But the word "see" is more commonly used as view through your vision.

 

[andrewg927]

We do not normally use 'see' in the progressive aspect in that sense; we normally prefer to use 'can' when we talk about what our eyes are picking up at the moment of speaking:

I thought John was in the garden, but I can't see him/[STRIKE]I'm not seeing him[/STRIKE].

You are right. I'm seeing someone usually means I'm dating someone. In this sense, "seeing" is very common.

 

[inase]

Talking about a progressive form, is the following difference valid?

A: Do you see him? (on the phone)
Normal answer:
B: Yes, I see him.
Limited context:
B: I am seeing him. (He is in front of me.)

 

[GoesStation]

Talking about a progressive form, is the following difference valid?

A: Do you see him? (on the phone)
Normal answer:
B: Yes, I see him.
Limited context:
B: I am seeing him. (He is in front of me.)

The progressive is not natural there.

 

[GoesStation]

B: I am seeing him. (He is in front of me.)

The progressive is not natural there.

To clarify: there is a case where B can make the quoted statement, and it could include a moment when "he is in front of [him]." It means "I'm dating him."

 

[inase]

I thought that "Do you see him?" had two meanings:

a. Are you in contact with him?
b. Is he in your view now? (instead of sometimes/regularly)

And that "Can you see him?" also had two meanings:

a. Is he in your view?
b. Are you in a position to see him? or Are you available to see him?

And I understand that you would normally use "I can see"I am seeing him." may possibly have the following meanings:

a. I am dating with him.
b. He is in front of me and I am currently talking with him! (Say, you don't believe that I am talking with Justin Bieber but I am actually talking with him.)

Inase

 

[andrewg927]

I thought that "Do you see him?" had two meanings:

a. Are you in contact with him? - You can add "often" to mean meeting as friends.
b. Is he in your view now? (instead of sometimes/regularly) - yes.

And that "Can you see him?" also had two meanings:

a. Is he in your view? - Yes.
b. Are you in a position to see him? or Are you available to see him? -if you add tomorrow, then yes.

Above.

 

[inase]

And I understand that you would normally use "I am seeing him." may possibly have the following meanings:

a. I am dating with him.
b. He is in front of me and I am currently talking with him! (Say, you don't believe that I am talking with Justin Bieber but I am actually talking with him.)

Oops! I posted unintelligible text. Let me replace the previous text with the above.