# I see/I'm seeing what you mean



## PokeP

Which of this two sentences would be grammatically correct?

I'm seeing what you mean.
I see what you mean.

Can I use both?


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

PokeP said:


> Which of this two sentences would be grammatically correct?
> 
> I'm seeing what you mean.
> I see what you mean.
> 
> Can I use both?



La primera suena rara, nunca la he escuchado. La segunda es la correcta.

Pura Vida


----------



## elianecanspeak

"I see what you mean" is correct.

Generally, you cannot use the progressive form with stative verbs of inert perception: understand, hate, recognize, believe, realize, etc.

This does not always hold true, especially in colloquial usage : "I'm hearing that you've had some problems lately".  (But this is a shortened form derived from I *have been *hearing . . , etc.)


----------



## FromPA

They're both correct, but they have different meanings.

I'm seeing what you mean - I'm in the process of understanding what you mean. I'm starting to understand what you mean.
I see what you mean - I understand what you mean.


----------



## Dlyons

PokeP said:


> Which of this two sentences would be grammatically correct?
> 
> I see what you mean.



Can I use both? Not really - you could say something like
"I'm beginning to see what you mean."


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

FromPA said:


> They're both correct, but they have different meanings.
> 
> I'm seeing what you mean - I'm in the process of understanding what you mean. I'm starting to understand what you mean.
> I see what you mean - I understand what you mean.



But in the first case, "I am starting to see what you mean" is used.


----------



## FromPA

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> But in the first case, "I am starting to see what you mean" is used.


 
That would certainly be the usual way to say it with the verb "to see,"  but the grammatical structure still works.  For instance, "I'm beginning to get it" is the same as "I'm getting it."


----------



## PokeP

Thanks for your answers. I thought first one was correct but in the meaning of "beginning to see"


----------



## Scalpel72

PokeP said:


> Which of this two sentences would be grammatically correct?
> 
> I'm seeing what you mean.
> I see what you mean.
> 
> Can I use both?



Usually the verbs of perception (senses) do not allow progressive forms, they are nonprogressive verbs together with some mental state, emotional state, possesion and other existing states.

The verb *to be* can have both structures
I am a physician ( permanent state of being)
He is being foolish ( transitory behaviour).

Th same the *verb to see*.
The Doctor is *seeing *a patient ( examining, different meaning)
I *see *a butterfly ( sense perception).

*I think both sentences are grammatical* because is not an act of perception but understanding.
I would appreciate a native to confirm my taking on these questions.

Regards
Scalpel72


----------



## FromPA

Scalpel72 said:


> Usually the verbs of perception (senses) do not allow progressive forms, they are nonprogressive verbs together with some mental state, emotional state, possesion and other existing states.
> 
> The verb *to be* can have both structures
> I am a physician ( permanent state of being)
> He is being foolish ( transitory behaviour).
> 
> Th same the *verb to see*.
> The Doctor is *seeing *a patient ( examining, different meaning)
> I *see *a butterfly ( sense perception).
> 
> *I think both sentences are grammatical* because is not an act of perception but understanding.
> I would appreciate a native to confirm my taking on these questions.
> 
> Regards
> Scalpel72


 
"I am smelling the flowers" is a perfectly valid sentence.
"I am understanding Spanish better now that I have taken a course"  is also a valid sentence.

I don't think there is any rule or logic that prevents you from using the progressive tense with any verb.


----------



## Dlyons

FromPA said:


> "I am understanding Spanish better now that I have taken a course"  is also a valid sentence.



"I understand Spanish better now that I have taken a course" is how I'd have written that.

If I read "I am understanding Spanish better now that I have taken a course", I'd have attributed it to a non-native speaker.  

English isn't easy.  And there are variations over regions and times.


----------



## FromPA

Dlyons said:


> "I understand Spanish better now that I have taken a course" is how I'd have written that.
> 
> If I read "I am understanding Spanish better now that I have taken a course", I'd have attributed it to a non-native speaker.
> 
> English isn't easy. And there are variations over regions and times.


 
How about, "I am having an easier time understanding Spanish now that I have taken a course"?  To me it's the same thing as saying "I am understanding Spanish better now..."    

Hey, the Irish have some pretty funny ways of saying things too.


----------



## Scalpel72

FromPA said:


> "I am smelling the flowers" is a perfectly valid sentence.
> "I am understanding Spanish better now that I have taken a course"  is also a valid sentence.
> 
> I don't think there is any rule or logic that prevents you from using the progressive tense with any verb.




I wonder FROMPA if :
I am having a car is correct??
I am loving my wife??
I am hating my neighbors??
I am belonging to the club??
I am needing a lot of attention??

Thanks

Regards
Scalpel72


----------



## Forero

Scalpel72 said:


> I wonder FROMPA if :
> I am having a car is correct??
> I am loving my wife??
> I am hating my neighbors??
> I am belonging to the club??
> I am needing a lot of attention??
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Regards
> Scalpel72


These particular sentences need more context, but they all have legitimate uses. I don't know if there is any verb that cannot be used in the progressive, but:


Several auxiliary verbs are never used in the progressive -
_I have gotten tired. 
I am having gotten tired. 
He dare not leave his shoes untied. 
He is daring not leave his shoes untied. 
He is daring to be different. _ [The presence of _to_ makes this possible.]


Some verbs tend to change meaning in the progressive -
_He is silly.
He is being silly._ [being silly = acting silly, approximately]
_He has soup._
_He is having soup._ [having soup = partaking of soup, approximately]


Some verbs have less flexibility in the progressive. I don't have any examples in mind, but the progressive/continuous tenses have lots of uses and some verbs don't work with the full set.
I hope this makes sense.


----------



## mylam

I can't think of any context when "I am having a car" would be correct. "I am having a baby" is perfectly correct, though. The other examples are all fine.


----------



## Forero

_Have_ changes meaning. One possibility is:

_I am having a car brought in from Dallas.

See_ can still mean something like "understand":

_I am seeing what you mean._ [Nos estamos coincidiendo.]


----------



## mylam

Alright, you found one! That makes perfect sense.  But (I'm not very strong on grammar) did you make "having" into an auxiliary verb there?


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

FromPA said:


> How about, "I am having an easier time understanding Spanish now that I have taken a course"?  To me it's the same thing as saying "I am understanding Spanish better now..."
> 
> Hey, the Irish have some pretty funny ways of saying things too.



I think those sentences are correct. I think what throws people off is the use of "I am" instead of "I'm" because native speakers usually don't say "I am."

I'm having an easier time understanding now.
I'm understanding it a lot better now.


----------



## elianecanspeak

Forero said:


> _I am having a car brought in from Dallas.
> _


_

This doesn't count because the "have" is a causative, not indicative of possession.

How about "I am having second thoughts"?_


----------



## Dlyons

FromPA said:


> How about, "I am having an easier time understanding Spanish now that I have taken a course"?  To me it's the same thing as saying "I am understanding Spanish better now..."
> 
> Hey, the Irish have some pretty funny ways of saying things too.



It's an odd language - the first sounds perfect to me and the second strange.  But I haven't the slightest  idea why!!!

And I still use words like "fortnight" which cause puzzlement and amusement in equal measures.


----------



## Forero

elianecanspeak said:


> "I see what you mean" is correct.
> 
> Generally, you cannot use the progressive form with stative verbs of inert perception: understand, hate, recognize, believe, realize, etc.
> 
> This does not always hold true, especially in colloquial usage : "I'm hearing that you've had some problems lately". (But this is a shortened form derived from I *have been *hearing . . , etc.)


Even if "I am hearing" were less acceptable than "I have been hearing", the latter would still be a progressive form too. Neither sounds at all wrong to me, or even questionable.





elianecanspeak said:


> This doesn't count because the "have" is a causative, not indicative of possession.
> 
> How about "I am having second thoughts"?


I don't think this _having_ means "possessing" or "owning" even though the second thoughts would be my own. Here I think _having_ means something like "experiencing".

Of course, even when "am having" indicates possession, it can still be used in the progressive just as "am possessing" can. Not with the full set of possible meanings of a progressive/continuous tense, but not impossible either.


----------



## Scalpel72

Scalpel72 said:


> Usually the verbs of perception (senses) do not allow progressive forms, they are nonprogressive verbs together with some mental state, emotional state, possesion and other existing states.
> 
> The verb *to be* can have both structures
> I am a physician ( permanent state of being)
> He is being foolish ( transitory behaviour).
> 
> Th same the *verb to see*.
> The Doctor is *seeing *a patient ( examining, different meaning)
> I *see *a butterfly ( sense perception).
> 
> *I think both sentences are grammatical* because it is not an act of perception but understanding.
> I would appreciate it if a native confirms my take on these questions.
> 
> Regards
> Scalpel72


----------



## daniar

Sorry for commenting after a very, very long time, but all grammar books agree that there are certain verbs that are generally not used in progressive tenses (in some of their meanings, without changing their meanings), ie 'stative/state/non-continuous' verbs.  I haven't seen any grammar book whose authors believe 'I'm understanding. ..' is grammatically correct. I would certainly be corrected if I began my sentence this way in the classroom. I understand languages evolve and surely we'll be hearing more and more of 'I'm liking/loving/understanding...', but I don't agree there is no rule that prevents you from using a progressive form with any verb. Well, there are rules . However,  they certainly don't prevent both native and non-native speakers from violating them. By the way, isn't 'fortnight' British?


----------



## Forero

daniar said:


> Sorry for commenting after a very, very long time, but all grammar books agree that there are certain verbs that are generally not used in progressive tenses (in some of their meanings, without changing their meanings), ie 'stative/state/non-continuous' verbs.  I haven't seen any grammar book whose authors believe 'I'm understanding. ..' is grammatically correct. I would certainly be corrected if I began my sentence this way in the classroom. I understand languages evolve and surely we'll be hearing more and more of 'I'm liking/loving/understanding...', but I don't agree there is no rule that prevents you from using a progressive form with any verb. Well, there are rules . However,  they certainly don't prevent both native and non-native speakers from violating them. By the way, isn't 'fortnight' British?


I have seen more grammar books without such a rule than with it, such a rule being useful only for beginning to intermediate nonnative speakers and their teachers.

As far as I know, progressive tenses for most such verbs were used by native speakers, in the ways we use them now, long before the first grammar book mentioning not using them was published, just as "prepositions" were used at the end of sentences long before anyone published a "rule" against it. Ditto for "split" infinitives.

Where I live, the frequency of "I'm liking/loving/understanding", outside of a particular advertising slogan, does not appear to be increasing. But neither is it likely to decrease based on a "rule" most of us have never seen or heard.

The same goes for "I'm seeing what you mean" when it means "I'm understanding what you mean."

Yes, there are verbs that we never use in progressive tenses, mainly auxiliary verbs, and verbs that nonnatives tend to use in progressive tenses in contexts where we natives never would, and yes, the meaning of the verb in context does affect the relative frequency of its progressive forms, but a supposed dichotomy between stative verbs and other verbs is really not what most of us native speakers use in deciding whether to use a simple or a progressive form in a given sentence.

I believe there is a rule that we natives use that really works, but the one you have learned is oversimplified and incomplete. I suggest that you not use "I'm liking/loving/understanding" inappropriately (where we natives would not use that form), but also that you not claim we natives are misusing our own language when we use such a form appropriately.

The key to appropriate use of progressive tenses is a deep understanding of what such forms mean to native speakers and precisely how the meaning of a verb in context affects the way we interpret verbal aspect. For example, "I am loving it here with all the trees and flowers" is a perfectly good sentence, but "I'm loving you for all the things you do for me" is odd, at least without supporting context. The meaning of "love" is approximately the same in both cases, but there is a difference between the two contexts in how that "loving" relates to time. In particular, my reason for loving it here seems to be seasonal and associated with a particular locale, but my reason for loving you is fixed by your innate personality and your past behavior that demonstrates that personality.


----------



## duvija

Temper tamtrums were had by linguists (like my passive?) with McD "I'm loving it" ....


----------



## Forero

duvija said:


> Temper tamtrums were had by linguists (like my passive?) with McD "I'm loving it" ....


The McD's slogan has always disturbed me, but not the "I'm loving" part. It bothers me because I can't think of a decent antecedent for "it" that would not be better off explcitly stated. The slogan is disconnected with no proper context.


----------



## duvija

Forero said:


> The McD's slogan has always disturbed me, but not the "I'm loving" part. It bothers me because I can't think of a decent antecedent for "it" that would not be better off explcitly stated. The slogan is disconnected with no proper context.



eppur si muove...


----------



## daniar

Here's what Grammar Girl says about the subject: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-im-loving-it-proper-grammar
'Language is constantly changing. Enough people seem to be using stative verbs in progressive tenses that we can probably say it’s becoming more accepted in popular culture to use them that way. That said, it’s still probably best for ESL teachers to continue to advise their students not to say, “I’m loving it” or to use other potentially incorrect stative verbs in progressive tenses. ESL teachers should point out, though, that students will hear native speakers using stative verbs in progressive tenses when the moment seems right.' That's exactly what I was trying to say.


----------



## Forero

daniar said:


> Here's what Grammar Girl says about the subject: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/is-im-loving-it-proper-grammar
> 'Language is constantly changing. Enough people seem to be using stative verbs in progressive tenses that we can probably say it’s becoming more accepted in popular culture to use them that way. That said, it’s still probably best for ESL teachers to continue to advise their students not to say, “I’m loving it” or to use other potentially incorrect stative verbs in progressive tenses. ESL teachers should point out, though, that students will hear native speakers using stative verbs in progressive tenses when the moment seems right.' That's exactly what I was trying to say.


I wholeheartedly disagree with Grammar Girl on this subject.

Where I live, "I am seeing what you mean" and "I am loving it" are perfectly natural sentences and do not represent an innovation in the language. "I am seeing" has been around as long as "I am eating". "I am seeing" did not originate in some "popular culture" but is built-in to the language itself. It is not a mistake made by careless natives but an exception that "proves" the rule.

The innovation is the creation of the category "stative verbs" and rules to go with them that are sometimes contrary to the way native experts use the language. This is especially true when it comes to English verbal aspect: progressive, perfect, perfect progressive.

The truth is that non-native English speakers, since they don't have the experience in the language that we natives do, often misunderstand what progressive aspect is for. Descriptions and rules were devised to explain the issue, but the descriptions and rules were inaccurate. Useful, perhaps, but not in total accord with native speakers' usage or with the motivation behind it.

No other language has progressive aspect verbal constructions quite like ours. Some other languages have things like present perfect and past perfect that are very similar to ours, but for some reason they tend to use present perfect as if it were a past tense and "phase out" the traditional past tense.

This, together with the multitude of uses for _-ing_ forms in general, also unique to English, makes it difficult to explain English verbal aspect usage to non-native speakers.

What is needed is a better description of what progressive aspect is and how it is affected by context and different types of verbs.

"The man seeing the bear was unarmed" is a perfectly good sentence. Do these rules allow it? Do they allow "I don't like him seeing me this way"?


----------

