Verbes perception /pp progressifCours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais || En bas
Message de hicks77 posté le 29-09-2013 à 20:30:55 (S | E | F)
Bonsoir à tous,
J'ai bien compris qu'on ne peut pas utiliser le present perfect progressive avec des verbes de perception (entre autres exceptions), mais j'ai entendu hier soir dans un film la phrase suivante : "I haven't been hearing that".
Un américanisme ? Ou ai-je oublié quelque chose ?
Un grand merci à tous et bonne soirée.
Modifié par lucile83 le 29-09-2013 21:14
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 29-09-2013 à 21:05:58 (S | E)
I can see you (voir)
I can hear you (entendre)
I can feel a stone in my shoe (sentir, toucher)
I can smell smoke (sentir, odorat)
I can taste salt in my coffee ! (sentir, goût)
ok, pour les verbes de perceptions purs, can "remplace be + ing quand ça se passe maintenant.
Mais si le verbe a un autre sens, alors il se comporte "normalement"
to hear: entendre dire que, apprendre une rumeur.....: I've been hearing horrible stories about you.
to smell: flairer: the dog is smelling my shoes.
to see: rencontrer: I'll be seeing you !
to see: fréquenter: Who are you seeing these days ?
to taste: gouter: The expert is tasting the wine.
to feel:tâter: He is feeling the cloth to see if it is smooth.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de hicks77, postée le 29-09-2013 à 21:33:20 (S | E)
Super j'ai bien compris. Merci gerondif.
Modifié par hicks77 le 29-09-2013 21:34
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 29-09-2013 à 22:38:11 (S | E)
Autre exemple : "I have been hearing voices in my head since I was a child".
Ici, hear a vraiment son sens de verbe de perception. A mon avis cette règle que vous invoquez n'a pas vraiment lieu d'être; en fait, ce qui se passe c'est que le plus souvent les perceptions sont des événements ponctuels, donc on emploie la forme normale, mais dans le cas de perceptions habituelles, répétées, il n'y a pas de raison de se priver de la forme progressive.
Je serais donc tenté de dire que les verbes de perception se comportent comme les autres, d'un point de vue syntaxique, pour ce qui concerne l'usage ou non de la forme progressive, mais que de par leur sens, on éprouve assez rarement le besoin de les employer à la forme progressive.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de hicks77, postée le 29-09-2013 à 22:54:58 (S | E)
Intéressant comme réflexion... Je vais encore devoir changer mes notes.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 29-09-2013 à 22:59:02 (S | E)
Je ne partage pas votre analyse.
dans votre exemple, since oblige à la forme en ing:
"I have been hearing voices in my head since I was a child".
si le verbe hear signifie vraiment entendre, capter un son qui vient de l'extérieur et rentre dans votre oreille, (tympan , marteau, enclume, étrier etc), alors, vous ne le mettrez pas en ing:
"I am hearing a noise in the garden" n'ira pas (verbe de perception pur) "I can hear voices in the garden"
"I am hearing voices" est autre chose, vous êtes victime d'une hallucination auditive, ça n'est pas une capacité physique.
"I can hear voices, is there someone inside ?" c'est autre chose.
Je pense donc que "mon" système (pas le mien d'ailleurs) tient la route!
Les verbes de perception utilisés comme tels ne se mettent pas en ing;
je te vois, sors de ta cachette ne peut pas se traduire par "I am seeing you!"
"I can see you ! Come out of your hiding place!"
Par contre "I hear that you have made it big!" n'est pas un verbe de perception pur."(I have been told that....)
"I hear voices" au sens de "I am mad" "I am not myself" est un état, pas une action de perception.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 29-09-2013 à 23:28:14 (S | E)
J'entends votre objection. Que penseriez vous de phrases comme celles-ci :
"I have been hearing the same story for years", "Recently I have been hearing a clicking sound from my car, I should have it checked next week".
Il me semble que ces phrases fonctionnent, et que là ce sont de vraies perceptions (pour autant qu'on puisse être capable de distinguer les vraies des fausses, ayant usé et abusé de la prose de P K Dick dans ma jeunesse j'ai parfois des doutes). Je pense que si on ne peut pas dire "I am hearing a noise in the garden", c'est parce qu'il s'agit dans ce cas d'une perception ponctuelle, immédiate. C'est une question d'aspect (comme toujours avec la forme progressive). Je ne vois pas bien la nécessité de poser une interdiction de la forme progressive pour des verbes de perception, si c'est pour ensuite devoir expliquer qu'en fait il y a beaucoup de cas où on l'utilise parce qu'il ne s'agit plus vraiment de perception. Je suis plutôt pour le rasoir d'Occam, la règle générale semble peut-être ne pas s'appliquer aux verbes de perception uniquement parce qu'on l'interprète mal dans ce cas.
Modifié par simplicius le 29-09-2013 23:32
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 29-09-2013 à 23:44:52 (S | E)
IL y a un fait intéressant dans ce que vous dites, Gerondif (pas qu'un, mais je rebondis sur celui-là) :
on dit "I can hear voices, is there someone inside"? et non, me semble-t-il, "I hear voices, is there someone inside"?
Donc il y a peut-être des limitations à l'expression de la perception immédiate qui vont bien au-delà de l'impossibilité de la forme -ing. Le présent simple est impossible aussi dans ce contexte. En revanche on peut dire "I have just heard a noise", "I heard a strange noise last night".
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 30-09-2013 à 00:16:09 (S | E)
"J'entends votre objection." super choix de mots! On le traduit comment ? "I am hearing your objection ?" sans doute pas.
I can hear your objection?" uniquement si on vient de vous opérer des oreilles et que vous ré-entendez bien ! encore que... si hear signife understand:
"I can understand your objection".
I see what you mean! I can see your point! I understand your point of view !
Par rapport à vos exemples qui fonctionnent avec for, since ou recently, donc du present perfect progressif:
"I have been hearing the same story for years", hear ici est employé à la place de listen.
I have been listening to the same story for years, I have been submitted to the same story for years,....they've been telling me the same story for years"
"Recently I have been hearing a clicking sound from my car, I should have it checked next week". pour moi, on rajoute ici à l'idée de ce verbe une notion d'agacement: I have been pestered with that clicking sound, I keep hearing that sound."
Si on n'avait pas recently, on ne pourrait pas dire: "Listen! I am hearing a clicking noise! I'll have to have it checked".
D'un autre côté, "I can hear a clicking noise" effectivement a lieu maintenant et on ne gardera pas can au present perfect avec depuis:
"I have been able to hear a clicking noise recently" ne va pas, on retombe donc sur:"Recently I have been hearing a clicking sound from my car, I should have it checked next week". Je ne vois pas d'autre solution mais l'ing est imposé par recently.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 30-09-2013 à 00:45:10 (S | E)
Pas sûr que le recently y soit pour quelque chose, ni l'agacement, à mon avis ce qui est significatif ici c'est le fait d'une perception répétée sur une certaine période de temps. "I have been hearing shrieks coming from the tower for the last three hundred years". On peut dire, "I have just heard a shriek coming from the tower" ou "Last night I heard a shriek coming from the tower", ou "Sometimes I hear shreaks coming from the tower".
Qu'est ce qui fait que, pour dire que, à l'instant même, j'entends un cri, on doit dire "I can hear a shriek"? Il va falloir que je me plonge dans mon Quirk, je sens que je ne vais pas y couper...
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de notrepere, postée le 30-09-2013 à 05:33:35 (S | E)
The verb "to hear" is considered a "mixed" verb. It can either be used as a normal verb, or a special (non-continuous) verb.
She hears the music. Non-Continuous Verb
She hears the music with her ears.
She is hearing voices. Normal Verb
She hears something others cannot hear. She is hearing voices in her mind.
"I have been hearing shrieks coming from the tower for the last three hundred years".
This sentence is OK because "hear" is being used as a normal verb.
We don't have much context for the original example: "I haven't been hearing that"
But we can imagine something:
-"Everyone keeps saying that John's football days are over."
-"Funny, I haven't been hearing that." (=I've been hearing a lot of things, but that's not one of them)
-"I haven't heard that." (=I have never heard such a thing)
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de irish21, postée le 30-09-2013 à 06:38:45 (S | E)
just wanted to point out something about this sentence: "Recently I have been hearing a clicking sound from my car, I should have it checked LAST week".
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 30-09-2013 à 08:46:56 (S | E)
what I meant was, that I need to have it checked. I should do it next week. I should have it checked next week. Isn't that correct ?
Modifié par simplicius le 30-09-2013 08:54
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 30-09-2013 à 14:09:01 (S | E)
I realize today that the question was about the present perfect progressive , not the simple be + ing, the present progressive. So I was answering a question I hadn't been asked !
In the present perfect progressive, to hear can indeed be found, as you can see in the numerous examples by Simplicius or notrepere. What I explained about the real perception verbs is still true but didn't answer the original question.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de traviskidd, postée le 30-09-2013 à 14:35:33 (S | E)
L'emploi des verbes normalement incompatible avec l'aspect continu, dans cet aspect, indique que l'on subit (est en train de subir) l'experience de percevoir ou sentir quelque chose. Sous-entendu est que l'experience est fugace et peut être susceptible à se terminer à n'importe quel moment.
"I'm having chest pains; I think I should go to the hospital."
"I'm lovin' it!" (Slogan de McDonald's, version française est "C'est tout ce que j'aime !")
"Seeing stars, I'm seeing stars!" (De la fameuse chanson trance de Paul Oakenfold "Starry-Eyed Surprise")
Selon moi "I haven't been hearing that" marche bien, signifiant qu'on entend recemment parler de quelconques choses, mais pas ça. A distinguer de "I haven't heard that" ce qui veut simplement dire qu'on n'a pas entendu parler de ça.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 30-09-2013 à 15:10:17 (S | E)
First, the link provided by notrepere is very intersting, it expounds the theory in very clear terms . There are normal verbs (which admit of progressive tenses) and non-continuous verbs, which don't; and to hear functions really as two verbs, one which is normal, and the other, which is non-continuous.
This explains things. On the other hand, I don't like it, I find it too complicated. Why should we assume that there are two verbs packed in a single one ? I think one should look for an explanation elsewhere. This is going to be long and sententious, you've been warned!
Let me try to sum up what the progressive form is used for.
1) in the present progressive : the process is going on, it is viewed as a continuous process, in French we would use "en train de..." to the same effect (more or less).
2) in the perfect tenses (eg present perfect progressive) the process has taken place repeatedly, or continuously, for a certain period of time, up to now or up to some point in time.
Now what does 'hear' mean ? Primarily, to percieve through the sense of hearing; to become aware of some sound. This is, by essence, a punctual process. So, naturally, it doesn't work with the present progressive which supposes a continuous process. In French too, we don't readily say "Je suis en train d'entendre", and we don't need a rule to exclude that form, it's just that it just doesn't make sense to say that, usually.
On the other hand, you can hear something repeatedly, so naturally to hear works with the present perfect progressive.
Here is a sentence, which I think is correct: "I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing". Please don't tell me that here, "hear" is a different verb from the one in "I can hear you". In French, we would say "J'aimerais pouvoir enregistrer ce que je suis en train d'entendre". So, after all, to hear works with the progressive form, in certain special circumstances. Here, the idea is one of simultaneousness, I'd like to record the sound at the very moment when I hear it.
To summarize my point: instead of assuming that to hear enjoys a special grammatical status (along with to see, etc), why not consider that the usual rules apply, but that, in view of its meaning, to hear is not felt to represent a continuous process, except on rare special occasions, and therefore, usually not used in the present progressive?
Let me take another example. You almost never say that gold is cheap. We could define a category of 'cheap-averse-nouns' which don't usually work with the adjective 'cheap', and say that 'gold', 'diamond', and 'healthcare in the US' belong to that category. And then we would perhaps find an occurrence of 'cheap gold' and say ok, but it's a different word from the other gold. That would be clearly absurd, you don't say 'cheap gold' because under normal circumstances gold isn't cheap, that's all.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 30-09-2013 à 17:07:05 (S | E)
I am probably a grammatical moron but I do see a difference:
"Here is a sentence, which I think is correct: "I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing". Please don't tell me that here, "hear" is a different verb from the one in "I can hear you".
In "I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing", I think it means entendre dire: J'aimerais enregistrer ce que j'entends dire, ce qu'on me raconte, ce qu'on me confie. Or did you mean: "I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing now (what I am able to hear) with my new hearing-aid ? if so, yes, hear works both ways.
All I was saying in that in "Scream" the white-masked criminal running after the future victim he is about to slice open would say:
"I can hear you ! You can't escape! I'm gonna get you".
I think my students in secondary school wouldn't understand your theory about how to present "hear" even if I see what you mean.
For me, "I'm hearing you" means: I understand what you mean, I'm with you.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 30-09-2013 à 19:40:46 (S | E)
Hi Gerondif, what I meant was very litteral, "I'd like to be able to record the sounds I'm hearing", not the rumours which reach me. To give you some context, let's say that I listen to radio programs on the internet by streaming, and I would like to be able to record them while I listen to them, so as to be able to play them back later.
So, perhaps in that case you'll agree that in that context, the verb 'to hear' is the same as the one in 'I can hear the bells of Notre Dame de Paris from my balcony', and the progressive form is natural. The difference is one of aspect, and the progressive form does its usual job in terms of aspect.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 30-09-2013 à 20:05:03 (S | E)
Yes, but in that case I would rather say: "I'd like to record the radio programs I'm listening to". To listen is an action verb, and ing is fine.
"I'd like to record the sounds I'm hearing" doesn't mean the same to me.
For me "to see" is something everybody does when they open their eyes whereas "to look" is an action, so I make a difference between "I can see you" and "What are you looking at ?"
The same would apply to "hear " versus "listen".
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de notrepere, postée le 30-09-2013 à 22:57:21 (S | E)
Hello grammatical moron (gerondif)
I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing.
I can hear you.
Yes, I think they are being used differently.
I'd like to be able to record what I'm hearing.
In this case "hearing" is equivalent to "perceiving". I'd like to be able to record what I'm perceiving.
I can hear you. I am physically able to hear you. It does not equate to "I can perceive you", at least not in the same way.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de irish21, postée le 01-10-2013 à 01:22:13 (S | E)
'have' as a causative verb has misled me because 'get' sounds more natural to me.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 01-10-2013 à 07:07:43 (S | E)
Good morning everybody,
Thank you for your responses; your critics make me see things more and more clearly! In all the examples I gave, which are, I think, valid and natural, 'to hear' has the same basic meaning of 'to perceive by the ear'. One may detect nuances, of course, as with any other verbs in various usages, especially general purpose verbs of that sort, but my claim is that the main difference you perceive is that of aspect, which is expressed by the progressive form with respect to the simple form. You could argue equally, that in "I run", run doesn't say the same thing as in "I am running"; in the first case it is more the notion of running, in the second case, the actual process of running.
I do not mean to convince, but for my part, I will refrain from adopting the complicated theory and prefer to fine-tune my understanding of the opposition of the progressive form vs the simple form...
Modifié par lucile83 le 01-10-2013 15:13
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de gerondif, postée le 12-10-2013 à 12:40:41 (S | E)
Sorry to bring up that old subject but I have to be honest and tell you that yesterday, watching a DVD "basic" bought 1 euro at some flea market, I heard the pilot of the helicopter coming to pick up soldiers in the jungle saying "I'm not seeing them!" . Well, anything goes ! It didn't spoil the film though !
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de aneth-estragon, postée le 12-10-2013 à 14:08:27 (S | E)
...I heard the pilot of the helicopter coming to pick up soldiers in the jungle saying "I'm not seeing them!"
What's interesting is to wonder why this native speaker chose that turn instead of the correct "I can't see them".
If anything, I think it adds to the distress of the situation, conveying maybe some eagerness and urge and despair from the pilot whose eyes must be popping out of their sockets. He's trying hard to spot the soldiers. "I should be seeing them by now, but I'm not! And if I'm not seeing them NOW, I never will."
I was also watching a video recently and heard a nice occurrence of present continuous. It was a designing tutorial and a painter was explaining how he could achieve this and that effect... and he kept saying "I'm liking this colour!" I thought the tense added to the feeling that the man was totally immersed in his act of creation.
As much as we (non native speakers) can try to understand these licences, though, I don't think wise to use them before we are very advanced.
Modifié par lucile83 le 12-10-2013 15:04
Mise en forme standard
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de lemagemasque, postée le 12-10-2013 à 15:12:00 (S | E)
Je traduirais "I'm liking this color!" par "Je commence à aimer cette couleur !" ou "J'aime cette couleur !" (alors que normalement, je ne l'aime pas) et "I'm not seeing them!" par "Je ne les vois pas (pour le moment) !".
Pour moi, quand on utilise la forme progressive avec les verbes de perception, on accentue l'instant présent (I'm not seeing them) ou on marque le décalage entre l'habitude et le résultat présent (I'm liking this color) ...
On trouve la même chose avec "I like reading" et "I like to read that book".
"I can see a man by a dog" est une simple description, figée, et "I'm seeing a man by a dog" = "Je vois (sur l'instant) un homme près d'un chien"
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de violet91, postée le 12-10-2013 à 15:22:30 (S | E)
Totally accurate , aneth-estragon gerondif and lemagemasque . I also agree with you about avoiding teaching exceptional cases before learners manage quite well at English .
Reading all of you , I was thinking of scientists in the process of discovering something new and great !
Pasteur looking through his microscopes and saying : -Oh I am seeing that cell or that germ is developing this or that way .
As np also said , perception verbs are considered mixed verbs ...but most students know very little about that ('Be + -ing ' form ) unless they come across an example when reading literature in a specific course called 'anglais spécialité ' ( 17-18 year old pupils ) , otherwise , they ARE high levelled English students at university .
Don't mind me , simplicius, telling you I can't agree with the following point either :
- You hear or you don't hear at your birth . Or , you are very unfortunate and have inherited a family disease and you are becoming deaf ( recategoris/zation as we call it over here ) or have become or became deaf because of some accident .( cf Henri Laborit ' s works and the example of his deaf and dumb grand daughter ) .
A no problem baby hears all sorts of sounds, then discriminates them : he can hear his mother ´s voice , he can smell and recognize his mother's bosom at (breast-)feeding times ...all the same with/for the other senses.
And as already said three times above , perception verbs do change their meanings according to the use of simple tenses and continuous ones.
-You hear voices in your mind rather than in your ears , we don't . You must be another Joan of Arc . Fancy hearing such things !
- You can hear voices probably from the knave ; quite right , we're just outside King's College Chapel ! It is time for the great choir to rehearse . You have a good ear and so do we !
- if you'd seen and been listening to Xenakis at work , you would have heard : 'Ah ! This is it ! I've never been hearing (still in his ears-- you'll probably object - I've never heard ) such a sound since ages ! But practising at producing new sounds.../ Again and again for pleasure !
And as a guest and witness , you said : - ah ! I am hearing you now ! I understand .
See you . Short of time and suspicious about hyphens . Apologies
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de lucile83, postée le 12-10-2013 à 18:44:14 (S | E)
Merci de ne pas partir dans des discussions sans fin, reprenant les messages antérieurs pour appuyer ses (trop) longs discours philosophico-grammairiens ..(ne cherchez pas, je viens de l'inventer). On a eu par le passé ce genre d'expérience malheureuse et je ne tiens pas à la renouveler.
Vous avez la messagerie privée pour ça.
Réponse: Verbes perception /pp progressif de simplicius, postée le 12-10-2013 à 19:03:09 (S | E)
Thank you very much Gerondif for providing this new example of a perception verb in the progressive form. It's quite interesting. I note that several of you try to find excuses for this helicopter pilot (stress, despair, being in a one-euro DVD movie, what not ), you will not be surprised that I don't think he needs any. Here are two examples I recently came across: "I saw him as I am seeing you now." "I don't like what I'm seeing". Cheers, S.
PS: lemagemasque, je suis entièrement d'accord avec votre dernier message. La forme progressive, utilisée avec un verbe de perception, focalise sur l'instant présent, sa spécificité, l'expérience de la perception en train de se faire... J'ajouterai juste qu'en cela, elle fait son travail habituel de forme progressive.
Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais