• notice sth changing vs. notice sth changed

Question

Hi! I read the following question in a TOEIC book:

“Seasonal Affective Disorder

also known asthe winter blues, can do more than put a person in a bad mood. According to psychologists at the University of Chicago School of Medicine, the winter blues is a serious cyclical depression that can drastically affect a person’s work performance.

…

… People with SAD begin to notice their moods ______ as soon as they start thinking about the onset of winter. For many people the symptoms of SAD are triggered as soon as the clocks go back an hour and we lose an hour of sunlight.

(A) changes

(B) changing

(C) to change

(D) changed

(Answer: B)” ((Longman Preparation Series for the New TOEIC Test, Advanced Course, 4th Edition, by Lin Lougheed, p. 163))

I think there is some reason that B (changing) is the ONLY correct answer, but I don’t know why D (changed) is wrong. (Grammatically, BOTH B (changing) AND D (changed) are correct. Idiomatically, B (changing) is correct and D (changed) is wrong in the above context, but I do NOT know the reason.) Is there anyone who can explain the reason? If there is, would you please help me?

Thanks in advance.

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

D is wrong because 'start' is present tense.

Niue · Answer

Thanks, Mister Micawber.

With your help, I've realized that there are some rules that I need to know to understand the original question. Would you please read the following and let me know whether my explanation is right or wrong?:

Rule #1.

Usually, verbs of perception (ex: see, hear, smell, notice, watch, etc.) does NOT take a PAST PARTICIPLE as its object complement BUT take a PRESENT PARTICIPLE as its object complement.

Rule #2.

Some verbs of perception can take 'that-clause' as its object, and in this case, the verb in the object-clause should be in accordance with the main verb.

Considering the above two rules, "changing" (PRESENT PARTICIPLE) is the only correct answer for the original question and "changed" (PAST PARTICIPLE or PAST VERB) can NOT be the correct answer.

Am I right?

Thanks in advance.

Mister Micawber · Answer

Yes, that's right; at least, the result is as you surmise: incorrect with the -ed form.

Niue · Answer

Thanks, Mister Micawber.

However, I've got a different opinion about Rule #1 from another native speaker.

Let me post the original questions and answers:

"

- by caxtontype:

I don't see how Rules #1 and #2 apply. Perhaps they do, but they are too technical for me to follow. ...

- by niue:

Thanks, caxtontype.
Let me explain how you apply the two rules:

1. You CAN say "People notice their moods changing (PRESENT PARTICIPLE) as soon as they start thinking about ~." (by applying Rule #1)
2. You can NOT say "People notice their moods changed (PAST PARTICIPLE) as soon as they start thinking about ~." (by applying Rule #1)
3. You CAN say "People noticed (that) their moods changed (PAST VERB) as soon as they started thinking about ~." (by applying Rule #2)
4. You can NOT say "People notice (that) their moods changed (PAST VERB) as soon as they start thinking about ~." (by applying Rule #2)

Thus, wheter "changed" is a PAST PARTICIPLE or PAST VERB, you can NOT say "People notice their moods changed as soon as they start thinking about ~."

- by caxtontype:

"You can NOT say "People notice their moods changed (PAST PARTICIPLE) as soon as they start thinking about ~." (by applying Rule #1)"

The sentence does contain a "that" clause. "That" is understood in this informal sentence. Thus, "changed" is a verb here, not a participle.

- by niue:

I don't think you understand what I mean. I just wanted to make an example sentence which has a structure of 'verb + object + object complement'.
Anyway, you don't see any structural difference between example sentence 2 and 4, do you?
Ok. Then, let ma ask you a question.

Q. What do you think of Rule #1 I've found? I don't think Rule #1 have no exception, but, in general, the rule can be applied correctly.
To help you understand what I mean, let me show you some example sentences which I think are (mostly) WRONG:

Ex1. I saw him gone. (WRONG)
Ex2. I saw the vase fallen. (WRONG)
Ex3. I saw the gems stolen. (WRONG)
Ex4. I saw the flowers grown. (WRONG)
Ex5. I saw the windows broken. (WRONG)

(However, I've found an exception to this rule:
Ex6. I heard the words spoken. (CORRECT))

If you don't think Rule #1 is correct, can you show me more example sentences which have the structure 'verb (of perception) + object + PAST PARTICIPLE'?

Thanks in advance.

- by caxtontype:

Ex1a. I saw him gone. I saw him disgraced and bankrupt.
Ex2a. I saw the vase fallen. I saw the leaves fallen from the trees.
Ex3a. I saw the gems stolen. I saw the gems stolen by a stealthy thief.
Ex4a. I saw the flowers grown. I saw some flowers grown in compost and others in plain dirt.
Ex5a. I saw the windows broken. I saw the windows broken and the house unpainted.

"What do you think of Rule #1 I've found?"

I think it is highly unlikely that you found it in a reputable source in the words in which you have presented it. If you constructed it yourself, you are congratulated on your interest in the structure of the language."

What do you think, Mister Micawber? (Especially, what do you think of the five example sentences I've made? Do you think they are correct, too?)

Thanks in advance.

• notice sth changing vs. notice sth changed

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions