I saw him tired/happy/red (etc)

D

dwni

Senior Member
Bulgarian
Hello! Can I use see in this construction?
I saw him tired/happy/amazed and so on.
 
    • dwni said:
    Hello! Can I use see in this construction?
    I saw him tired/happy/amazed and so on.
    Click to expand...
    "He looked/looks tired/happy/amazed" sounds more idiomatic to me. But I cannot say for sure if this works for your cantext because you have not given us real context. What is the situation, etc?
     
    I want to say something like 'When I saw him he looked happy.' but I am trying to shorten the sentence a bit.
    That is why I am wondering whether this construction with an adjective is okay.
     
    I saw him happy/tired/amazed would be possible when the time/occasion is qualified with something like "the one time I saw him happy was when ...", "the only time I saw him happy was when ...", "the first/last time I saw him happy was when ...".

    "I feel sad, because the only time I saw her looking happy was when she was running," Harney said. "I think she had a hard life. I don't know why or what was going on, and I'm sad he passed away, but I just know her, and it just doesn't add up." (wral)
    Click to expand...
    In this example above, "looking" could be omitted, so "the only time I saw her happy was when she was running,".

    Most native speakers would find "I saw him happy" (without any qualification) odd, we'd have to say "I saw him looking happy". But even so it's rather odd as a standalone sentence.
     
    Thank you very much!

    Is it better to use 'When I saw him he looked happy.' instead to say what I want to?
     
    Thank you very much! I want to say that I saw him and he looked happy/amazed at the same time.
    I think it is alot better to say ' 'When I saw him he looked happy.' or 'As I saw him he looked happy/amazed'.
    because both actions happen at the same time.
     
    dwni said:
    As I saw him he looked happy/amazed
    Click to expand...
    When I saw him he looked happy and amazed.
    happy/amazed
    Click to expand...
    This really doesn't work, especially in verbal expressions. The problem with "/" is it can mean "take your pick" in a sense often used in these forums which is why I misunderstood your example sentence to mean my choice of the three adjectives.
     
    Sorry for this simbol.
    By using this simbol '/' I mean that I can say either 'When I saw him he looked happy' or 'When I saw him he looked amazed'
     
    1When I saw him he looked happy.
    2When I saw him he looked amazed.
    They are okay. Are not they?
     
    dwni said:
    Hello! Can I use see in this construction?
    I saw him tired/happy/amazed and so on.
    Click to expand...
    Yes. It is relatively common:

    A: "John never drinks."
    B: "That's not true. I saw him drunk on Tuesday."

    A: Where's John?
    B: "I saw him busy in the office 10 minutes ago."

    These adjectives are often called "depictives".
     
    PaulQ said:
    Yes. It is relatively common:

    A: "John never drinks."
    B: "That's not true. I saw him drunk on Tuesday."

    A: Where's John?
    B: "I saw him busy in the office 10 minutes ago."

    These adjectives are often called "depictives".
    Click to expand...
    So does this construction sound natural only when it is used with time expressions?
     
    Daab said:
    So does this construction sound natural only when it is used with time expressions?
    Click to expand...
    I don't hear the construction often, but I suppose that time expressions are normal when people say such things:

    Carl: I don't ever get drunk.
    Lisa: I've seen you drunk before.

    I've seen you drunk     is certainly possible, however. It wouldn't sound unnatural in that little dialog.
     
    owlman5 said:
    I don't hear the construction often, but I suppose that time expressions are normal when people say such things:

    Carl: I don't ever get drunk.
    Lisa: I've seen you drunk before.

    I've seen you drunk     is certainly possible, however. It wouldn't sound unnatural in that little dialog.
    Click to expand...
    Thank you.
    Do you mean ‘I’ve seen you drunk’ is certainly possible as a standalone sentence?
     
    owlman5 said:
    You're welcome.

    Yes. It is a short, dry way to say this: I've seen you when you were drunk.
    Click to expand...
    Can you also say, I saw you drunk?
    I suspect that present perfect tense itself might imply before without mentioning it.
     
    “I saw my chameleon red ten minutes ago.”

    Is this sentence usable?

    How about this without a time phrase?

    “I saw my chameleon red.”

    And how about this again when the time phrase is implied in the conversation?

    A: What color was your chameleon ten minutes ago?
    B: I saw it red.
     
    OK, here’s a context that would work for the second one:
    A: What color was your chameleon ten minutes ago?
    B: Red.
    C: No, it was brown!
    B: No it wasn’t.
    C: Yes it was!
    B: Well, I saw it red.
     
    Daab said:
    “I saw my chameleon red ten minutes ago.”

    Is this sentence usable?
    Click to expand...
    Yes. It makes sense in light of chameleons' ability to be red whenever they need to.
    Daab said:
    How about this without a time phrase?

    “I saw my chameleon red.”
    Click to expand...
    That sounds fine to me too.
    Daab said:
    And how about this again when the time phrase is implied in the conversation?

    A: What color was your chameleon ten minutes ago?
    B: I saw it red.
    Click to expand...
    For me, this "answer" does not seem to fit the question asked.
     
    Then can I put ‘as’ in those sentences like:
    I saw my chameleon as red?

    I guess the sentences with ‘see’ and as’ in together seem to sound fine in most of the cases like:
    I saw her as kind.
    I saw him as cute.
    Right?

    When can you use this construction without ‘as’ and still sound correct?
     
    Daab said:
    Then can I put ‘as’ in those sentences like:
    I saw my chameleon as red?

    I guess the sentences with ‘see’ and as’ in together seem to sound fine in most of the cases like:
    I saw her as kind.
    I saw him as cute.
    Right?

    When can you use this construction without ‘as’ and still sound correct?
    Click to expand...
    This construction, with as, is not a version of that in #1. It is entirely different and has a completely different meaning.
     
    Forero said:
    This construction, with as, is not a version of that in #1. It is entirely different and has a completely different meaning.
    Click to expand...
    How are they different?

    I guess I know the difference.
    But aren’t these sentences somewhat overlap?

    I see it red
    I see it as red

    Am I wrong? Please explain.
     
    Last edited:
    Daab said:
    I saw her as kind.
    Click to expand...
    Here "saw" means "perceived". It is thinking, not using eyes. You cannot see "kind" with eyes.
    This means "I mentally evaluated her as being a kind person."

    Daab said:
    I see it as red
    Click to expand...
    It doesn't make sense to say "I mentally evaluate it to be a red object."

    Daab said:
    I see it red.
    Click to expand...
    This has no meaning, unless there are other sentences before it. "It" refers to the topic, so a topic must be defined. In English, the "topic" is usually the subject of a previous sentence. So you might write:

    The house is big. I see it red. (here "it" means "the house")

    However, the syntax "I see it red" is wrong. That is not a possible way (in English) to say "I see that the house is red."
     
    Daab said:
    How are they different?

    I guess I know the difference.
    But aren’t these sentences somewhat overlap?

    I see it red
    I see it as red

    Am I wrong? Please explain.
    Click to expand...
    There are multiple ways each sentence can be interpreted, depending on context, even if we assume it refers to a chameleon.

    What sort of overlap are you asking about, and in what context?
     
    Forero said:
    There are multiple ways each sentence can be interpreted, depending on context, even if we assume it refers to a chameleon.

    What sort of overlap are you asking about, and in what context?
    Click to expand...

    Does ‘I see it red’ mean ‘It looks or is red to me or to my eyes?’
    And can ‘I see it as red’ mean the same?

    If that is right, I think ‘I see it as red’ can be also interpreted as ‘I thought of it as red’ in some way.

    Seeing is kind of related to perceiving and thinking.
     
    Daab said:
    How are they different?
    Click to expand...
    You have given no context except that, if I remember correctly, you want it to refer to a chameleon. The difference between "I saw it red" and "I saw it as red" depends on the context.

    In the context of Joetofu's #23, I could say "It looked red to me", but "I saw it red" does not mean that to me and I don't even see how "I saw it red" could fit that context.

    One thing "I saw it red" might mean, in supporting context, is that I happened to look at the chameleon at a time when it had made itself as red as it was able to.

    Similarly, "I see it red" might mean that I look at the chameleon at times when it has made itself red.

    The other sentence, "I see it as red" never has that meaning. "I see it as red" can mean something like "In my opinion it looks red" or "It looks red from where I am sitting" (that is two different meanings, of course), but it has other possible interpretations depending on context.

    I have not been able to invent a context in which "I see it as red" could ever be a substitute for "I see that it is red."

    Neither have I been able to invent a context in which "I see it red" and "I see it as red" have similar meanings.

    I hope this helps.
     
    Forero said:
    You have given no context except that, if I remember correctly, you want it to refer to a chameleon. The difference between "I saw it red" and "I saw it as red" depends on the context.

    In the context of Joetofu's #23, I could say "It looked red to me", but "I saw it red" does not mean that to me and I don't even see how "I saw it red" could fit that context.

    One thing "I saw it red" might mean, in supporting context, is that I happened to look at the chameleon at a time when it had made itself as red as it was able to.

    Similarly, "I see it red" might mean that I look at the chameleon at times when it has made itself red.

    The other sentence, "I see it as red" never has that meaning. "I see it as red" can mean something like "In my opinion it looks red" or "It looks red from where I am sitting" (that is two different meanings, of course), but it has other possible interpretations depending on context.

    I have not been able to invent a context in which "I see it as red" could ever be a substitute for "I see that it is red."

    Neither have I been able to invent a context in which "I see it red" and "I see it as red" have similar meanings.

    I hope this helps.
    Click to expand...
    Thank you.

    Some native speakers here say that there is no sentences like ‘I saw it red’ in English. But you are saying that it is possible.

    I took the example of a chameleon because it changes its color. I can’t explain it well, but I thought that you say ‘I saw her happy’ with time phrases like ‘the first time I saw her happy was when…’ because she changes her mood.
     
    dwni said:
    I want to say something like 'When I saw him he looked happy.' but I am trying to shorten the sentence a bit.
    That is why I am wondering whether this construction with an adjective is okay.
    Click to expand...
    "I saw him happy" generally means that I saw him when he was happy. It is not about how he looked, it is not about how I looked at him, and it is not about my opinion of him.
    Daab said:
    I took the example of a chameleon because it changes its color. I can’t explain it well, but I thought that you say ‘I saw her happy’ with time phrases like ‘the first time I saw her happy was when…’ because she changes her mood.
    Click to expand...
    "The first time I saw her happy" means the first time that "I see her" and "she is happy" were both true. It says nothing about whether she was happy or sad when I did not see her or about whether I ever saw her when she was not happy.

    So the assumption of changeability facilitates tying time(s) to states, but it is not strictly necessary for sentences like "I saw her happy" to make sense.
     
    This seems paradoxical: red dress is not red! It renounces red; that's why it looks red -- people looking at you see it red because the red ray is going back and falls on their eyes and they see it as red.

    This excerpt is from A Sudden Class of Thunder written by Osho

    A Sudden Clash of Thunder

    Here you have both "see it red" and "see it as red." How are they different?
     
    I can only guess what Osho means here. "You see it red" is certainly not how I would say it, but maybe he means "you see it being red", "you see it's redness", or "you see red in it".
     
    dwni said:
    I want to say something like 'When I saw him he looked happy.' but I am trying to shorten the sentence a bit.
    That is why I am wondering whether this construction with an adjective is okay.
    Click to expand...
    In that context, you could say "I saw him looking happy", but "I saw him happy" is about how he was, not about how he looked.
     
    Can't say I'd use either of those! How about "When I saw him, he looked happy". That said, "I saw him happy, and I saw him sad" is possible - ie, "There were times when I saw him happy and times when I saw him sad." Not awful, but not great.
     
    My English is the same as post #41:

    - I saw him looking happy. :tick:
    - I saw him happy. :cross:

    Note that "I saw him happy" was said in the past, but it had a very different meaning. Here "saw" means "worked diligently in order to accomplish a goal" or "did whatever was necessary to accomplish a goal", where the goal was making him happy. It is similar to saying

    - I saw to it that he was happy.
     
    I think this needs to be straightforwardly stated:

    The sentence "I saw him looking happy" is not good English.

    "I saw him happy" is even worse.

    "I saw to it that he was happy" is perfectly good English, but it means something completely different. Or rather, it actually has a meaning, whereas the first two sentences do not.

    I'd try and finish this thread right here!
     
    It's a quirky way of speaking. No well-spoken British native would say "I saw him looking happy." A native speaker would say "He looked happy", or "I saw him and he looked happy". It's a tautological sentence; to describe someone as 'looking' happy, you have to see that person. So you don't need to include the words 'see' and 'looking' in the same sentence. Teaching quirky English isn't going to help a learner, who depends on boring old rules to construct sentences - otherwise the sky's the limit: "I saw him seeming to look happy" or "I saw him seeming to appear to look happy" etc etc; as many verbs of 'seeing' as you like, when you only really need one.
     
    The continuous form of the verb is often preferred when we want to talk about an action or state as it is perceived over time, rather than at a single moment.

    "I saw him look happy." This would be a little unusual, as it would indicate that I saw him (suddenly and briefly) look happy.

    "I saw him look happy for a moment, but then he was his miserable old self again."

    "I saw him looking happy (for a period of time, for example "...on Saturday night").
     
    Well, I didn't think I was being rude, but granted, a little dismissive and a bit pompous. I'll change that tone and let's drop the whole thing.

    I said I wouldn’t be back here, but having thought about it a bit more, I couldn’t resist a bit of clarification with regard to the question asked in this thread, at least from my point of view.

    It’s true that the phrase “I saw him looking sad” might be produced by a native English speaker in some situations. I find those situations quite hard to picture, but it might have been more sensible if I‘d asked straightaway for more context – because of course, like most of the questions here, this is a matter of context. Silly me.

    So, two possible contexts that ‘work’:

    1. Person A is asked by Person B about a mutual acquaintance, Person C.
    B: “Have you seen C recently? I think he won the lottery some time ago.”
    A: “Yes, yesterday at the pub I saw him looking very happy.”

    That works, but to my mind, something else is more likely: “Yes, yesterday at the pub he looked very happy.” – is more natural. Or “Yes, he was very happy when I saw him at the pub yesterday.” Perhaps I’m wrong to suggest that these alternatives are “more natural” – better to suggest perhaps that they’re more usual.

    2. Person A tells Person B: “I told my neighbour this morning that I’d won the lottery and that I wanted to give him £10,000. I saw him looking very happy.”

    That doesn’t work. This has to be simply “He looked very happy.”

    My original, perhaps questionable, reference to tautology may have been a bit pretentious. What I’m keen to convey to people who ask about language is how reasonable this or that expression might be, based on how often it’s used by speakers of good English.

    Hope this clarifies things slightly. Context Context Context.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top