# FR: to see sombody do/doing something



## Kamelie

I think that in the English language there is a difference between "to see sombody do something" and "to see somebody doing something". Which construction is correct depends on whether the action was completed unter the eyes of the observer or not.

I saw him do the dishes. 
= I observed the complete action, the dishes are clean now.

I saw him doing the dishes. 
= I saw him. He happened to be doing the dishes at the time. He might still be at it or not.

Do the French differentiate between these situations or could "Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle" mean either? To express the second case, could/should one use a gerund or present participle construction like "Je l'ai vu faisant/en faisant la vaisselle"?


----------



## tilt

Using a present participle doesn't work in such a sentence.
The most literal translation for *I saw him doing the dishes* that comes to my mind is *Je l'ai vu en train de faire la vaisselle*.
Yet, even if correct, this sentence is uselessly wordy, in my opinion, because *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle *already got this meaning.

 The difference, in French, won't stand in the tense but in the verb itself:
- *I saw him do the dishes* _= *Je l'ai regardé faire la vaisselle*._
_-_ *I saw him doing the dishes*_ = *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle*_.


----------



## OLN

If I use* watch *instead of _see _:_

- I watched him do the dishes _
_- I watched him doing the dishes_

Are both sentences correct or should the verb _to watch_ be avoided in the first one?
If they are, how would they be translated?

_- Je l'ai regardé faire la vaisselle._ 
_- Je l'ai obervé un instant pendant qu'il faisait la vaisselle_
*?*


----------



## geostan

tilt said:


> Using a present participle doesn't work in such a sentence.
> The most literal translation for *I saw him doing the dishes* that comes to my mind is *Je l'ai vu en train de faire la vaisselle*.
> Yet, even if correct, this sentence is uselessly wordy, in my opinion, because *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle *already got this meaning.
> 
> The difference, in French, won't stand in the tense but in the verb itself:
> - *I saw him do the dishes* _= *Je l'ai regardé faire la vaisselle*._
> _-_ *I saw him doing the dishes*_ = *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle*_.



I don't think the distinction can be made through the choice of a different verb. And if it did, I would probably reverse the translations. It seems to me more likely that _regarder_ would concentrate more on the activity than _voir_ which merely captures the moment.

Cheers!


----------



## Lépido

tilt said:


> Using a present participle doesn't work in such a sentence.
> The most literal translation for *I saw him doing the dishes* that comes to my mind is *Je l'ai vu en train de faire la vaisselle*.
> Yet, even if correct, this sentence is uselessly wordy, in my opinion, because *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle *already got this meaning.
> 
> The difference, in French, won't stand in the tense but in the verb itself:
> - *I saw him do the dishes* _= *Je l'ai regardé faire la vaisselle*._
> _-_ *I saw him doing the dishes*_ = *Je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle*_.


I absolutely agree with tilt: "je l'ai regardé faire la vaisselle" means watching at the whole act of washing the dishes (for instance, at the end of a "tête à tête" meal, the one who cooked "regarde faire la vaisselle" the other one, which means they stay together in the kitchen during that time), whereas "je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle" indicates that at the moment I happened to see him, he was precisely doing the dishes.
PS: buy a dishwashing machine... it's more ecological if you run it only when it's full... (-;


----------



## tilt

geostan said:


> I don't think the distinction can be made through the choice of a different verb. And if it did, I would probably reverse the translations. It seems to me more likely that _regarder_ would concentrate more on the activity than _voir_ which merely captures the moment.
> 
> Cheers!


I agree translating these sentences from French to English wouldn't lead to _I saw him do/doing the dishes_, but to two sentence with different verbs too.
But I keep not seeing how to say otherwise the difference introduced by the English tenses.


----------



## Kamelie

Thanks for all the suggestions.

(But a dishwasher starts to smell before it's full, when you live on your own...)


----------



## DaniL

Bonjour,

Qu'est-ce que vous dites de :

"Je l'ai vu finir la vaisselle" pour "I saw him do the dishes" ?


----------



## Lépido

DaniL said:


> Bonjour,
> 
> Qu'est-ce que vous dites de :
> 
> "Je l'ai vu finir la vaisselle" pour "I saw him do the dishes" ?  _pas le même sens_ ...


----------



## DaniL

Puisque "I saw him do the dishes" insiste sur ce que le fait qu'on a vu est accompli, pourquoi pas utiliser le verbe finir...


----------



## itka

DaniL said:


> Puisque "I saw him do the dishes" insiste sur ce que le fait qu'on a vu est accompli, pourquoi pas utiliser le verbe finir...



Avec le verbe *"finir"* tu ne dis pas la même chose : tu dis que tu l'as vu laver puis poser le dernier plat sur l'égouttoir, rincer l'évier, ranger la brosse ou l'éponge, s'essuyer les mains, etc.
Tu ne l'as donc pas vu faire _toute _la vaisselle mais seulement _la fin_.

Je ne vois pas d'autre traduction que celles de Tilt et de Lépido.


----------



## bopli

suggestion :

*1. "I saw him do the dishes" *
= j'ai vu qu'il a fait la vaisselle... ???  
(suis pas sûre mais ça pourrait aussi se traduire ainsi, je pense)
>>> the dishes are done - la vaisselle est faite

*2. "I saw him doing the dishes" *
= "je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle" / "je l'ai vu en train de faire la vaisselle", voire (selon phrase & contexte) "j'ai vu qu'il faisait la vaisselle" 
>>> il est en train de faire la vaisselle - I don't know if the dishes are done & clean - je ne sais pas si la vaisselle est faite 



Kamelie said:


> (...) To express the second case, could/should one use a gerund or present participle construction like "Je l'ai vu faisant/en faisant la vaisselle"?


*Important note :* both sentences (gerund and present participle) are different and don't mean the same thing.

*1. "je** l'ai vu faisant la vaisselle"* 
*(verbe au participe présent - present participle) *

= "je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle" - "(...) en train de faire la vaisselle" - "je l'ai vu pendant qu'il/alors qu'il faisait la vaisselle" 
>>> both subjects are not the same

*2. "je l'ai vu en faisant la vaisselle"* 
*(gérondif - gerund)*

= "je l'ai vu pendant que/alors que je faisais la vaisselle"
>>>  both subjects are the same



tilt said:


> Using a present participle doesn't work in such a sentence. (...)


Personnellement, je pense que grammaticalement c'est correct, même si je suis d'accord avec vous sur le fait que l'on préféra des tournures plus simples telles que "je l'ai vu faire la vaisselle" (le plus approprié) ou "je l'ai vu en train de faire la vaisselle" (plus parlé ?).


----------



## Kamelie

Ah, thanks for clarifying the use of gerund and present participle respectively. Langsam fällt der Groschen.


----------



## FreddieFirebird

I would like to say "I saw the team lose the game".  My attempts:  "J'ai vu l'équipe perd le match."  That seems like a computer translated it, so I thought perhaps it would be "J'ai vu l'équipe qui perd le match", but that doesn't seem right either.  Do I use a different pronoun to link these phrases?  Please and thanks!


----------



## ditnn

my attempt would be:

J'ai vu l'équipe *perdre* (infinitive form) la partie, which means you saw to the end that they lost the game.

but if you say:

"J'ai vu l'équipe en train de perdre la partie",

it means that you saw the team while they were losing but they might win in the end.


----------

