difference in both

[payal desai]

1. I didn't see them go
2.I didn't see them going

what's the difference between these two sentences

 

[engee30]

1. I didn't see them go
2.I didn't see them going

what's the difference between these two sentences

♥♦♣♠ NOT A TEACHER ♥♦♣♠

The meaning of the first sentence is that the whole event of their (not) going is in focus, while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their (not) going didn't actually occur.

 

[apex2000]

1. I didn't see them go
2.I didn't see them going

what's the difference between these two sentences

By difference are you asking for the meaning as opposed to the tenses?
They both convey the same meaning, but you could make a small emphasis if the action of leaving involved something more than just leaving. For example, in 1 the statement is clear and unambiguous, in 2 if the leaving involved a longer period of time with protracted goodbyes which you might have been expected to witness at least in part then that could be slightly better. But it is a very, very fine difference.

 

[payal desai]

Hi apex,
thanks i got that but one confusion is that if a person is telling someone that- i didn't see them going than does it also mean that he was also in process of going while seeing at someone and if not then what would be the correct statement for that

 

[payal desai]

♥♦♣♠ NOT A TEACHER ♥♦♣♠

The meaning of the first sentence is that the whole event of their (not) going is in focus, while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their (not) going didn't actually occur.

thanks i got that but one confusion is that if a person is telling someone that- i didn't see them going than does it also mean that he was also in process of going while seeing at someone and if not then what would be the correct statement for that

 

[Barb_D]

thanks i got that but one confusion is that if a person is telling someone that- i didn't see them going than does it also mean that he was also in process of going while seeing at someone and if not then what would be the correct statement for that

No.
I didn't see Mary walking. The speaker did not observe Mary while Mary was walking.
I didn't see Mary while I was walking. The speaker had been walking, and while the speaker was walking, he or she didn't see Mary.

 

[apex2000]

Hi apex,
thanks i got that but one confusion is that if a person is telling someone that- i didn't see them going than does it also mean that he was also in process of going while seeing at someone and if not then what would be the correct statement for that

The statements as you set them down are quite clear; there is no indication that the speaker is doing anything other than making the statement. Therefore you cannot assume that the speaker is 'going' anywhere. For that to be the case then your original statements would need extra wording to cover it.

 

[payal desai]

No.
I didn't see Mary walking. The speaker did not observe Mary while Mary was walking.
I didn't see Mary while I was walking. The speaker had been walking, and while the speaker was walking, he or she didn't see Mary.

OK so is it the only way to say that, taking another statement such as he is reading a book sitting under the tree may be the correct one.Are these type of formations applicable depending upon the type of events and also it is said like he goes shopping then can't we say that he is going shopping when he is to go for shopping.Are there any rules for these?

 

[bhaisahab]

OK so is it the only way to say that, taking another statement such as he is reading a book sitting under the tree may be the correct one.Are these type of formations applicable depending upon the type of events and also it is said like he goes shopping then can't we say that he is going shopping when he is to go for shopping.Are there any rules for these?

We say "He is going shopping". I know that in Indian English it is common to say "He is going for shopping" but in BrE and, I think, AmE and AusE "for" is not used.

 

[Khosro]

♥♦♣♠ NOT A TEACHER ♥♦♣♠

The meaning of the first sentence is that the whole event of their (not) going is in focus, while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their (not) going didn't actually occur.

Hello engee30! I am usually very comfortable with your posts. And I guess I know what is the difference between those 2 sentences. But now after reading your post I am totally confused. Can you write the bold part in some other way? Specially the "(not)" part.

 

[ihop]

Hi Bhaisahab ji,

You mentioned above that in Indian English "He is going for shopping" is being used. But do you think that is grammatically correct? I believe Indians are basically following British English, and that makes it incorrect.

I think "He is going shopping" is correct.

Similarly...

He is going swimming
He is going bowling etc.

Thanks,
Ihop

 

[apex2000]

That is a most interesting comment concerning Indians following British English. Certainly I have always understood that British English was the expected use particularly in government and the civil service. However, as in many parts of the world English becomes 'abused' where teaching of the language is of lower importance than many other matters.

You are perfectly correct in your usage.

 

[5jj]

Hi Bhaisahab ji,

You mentioned above that in Indian English "He is going for shopping" is being used. But do you think that is grammatically correct? I believe Indians are basically following British English, and that makes it incorrect.

The origins of 21st century Indian English lie in 18th-20th century British English, as do the origins of 21st century British English.

Just glance at any British or Indian newspapers today and you will see how the dialects have moved apart. We are told that 'going for shopping' is acceptable in Indian English. The fact that it is not acceptable in British English is irrelevant. Indians today are not 'following British English'; they are using their dialect of English, just as we speakers of BrE are using ours.

 

[engee30]

Hello engee30! I am usually very comfortable with your posts. And I guess I know what is the difference between those 2 sentences. But now after reading your post I am totally confused. Can you write the bold part in some other way? Specially the "(not)" part.

Thanks for your compliment.

The meaning of the first sentence is that the whole event of their (not) going is in focus[...]

We're talking about the process of going; however, the process doesn't seem to have taken place, as stated in the reported sentence, I didn't see them go. This is why I bracketed not, which actually means the process of not going.

[...]while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their (not) going didn't actually occur.

It should have been either, [...]while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their not going occurred, or [...]while that of the second one is that the focus is on a particular point at which the process of their going didn't actually occur.
In other words, the people in context (them, in I didn't see them going) were reported not to have been going at that particular time the speaker is talking about.

This is how I see it.