tenses

Hi,

Why do we say 'I saw the boy fall and break his arm'? Why are the bold verbs in the simple present tense when the first verb 'saw' is in the simple past tense?

These words, fall and break, are not present tense. They are the the 'bare' infinitive, ie the infinitive without 'to'.

Best wishes, Clive

Clive,

Why do we say 'I saw the boy fall and break his arm'? Why are the bold verbs in the simple present tense when the first verb 'saw' is in the simple past tense?

Thank you for telling me that fall and break are the the 'bare' infinitive, ie the infinitive without 'to'.

But I don't understand why it shouldn't me

Yes, an indication of the infinitive is that they may be replaced by the -ing form in some instances:

I saw the boy falling and breaking his arm.'

No present can be replaced this way.

Marius HancuYes, an indication of the infinitive is that they may be replaced by the -ing form in some instances:

I saw the boy falling and breaking his arm.'

No present can be replaced this way.

What you've said above doesn't explain why it should be I saw the boy fall and break his ar

Well, you know by now that in general you can't have two verbs closely connected (following each other in a construct) in the same mode and tense, thus saw requires -ing form or short infinitive.

saw falling/saw fall

NOT:
saw fell/saw fell

An indicative form can't be followed by another indicative form in such constructs.

I saw the boy fall and break his arm

It's a little confusing because in this sentence "fall" and "break" are not acting as verbs but as modifyers of "the boy". The actual action of the sentence, saw, is happening in the past. "Saw" is the verb.

Why do we say 'I saw the boy fall and break his arm'?

This is called a catenative structure. Verbs of perception, especially see and hear, are commonly used in these structures. The verb that tells what was perceived is in the base form (infinitive without "to").

I saw him fall.
We will see him break his arm.

Yoong Liat
What you've said above doesn't explain why it should be I saw the boy fall and break his arm.

I'm aware that I saw the boy falling and breaking his arm is grammatically correct.

What I want to know is why the first sentence starts with 'saw' but the other verbs are 'fall' and 'break'.

I think Liat's poin

Hi Yoong Liat,

Thank you for telling me that fall and break are the the 'bare' infinitive, ie the infinitive without 'to'.

But I don't understand why it shouldn't me 'I saw the boy fell and broke his arm'.

I see that a long discussion has ensued. I'd

Diamondrg

Yoong Liat
What you've said above doesn't explain why it should be I saw the boy fall and break his arm.

I'm aware that I saw the boy falling and breaking his arm is grammatically correct.

What I want to know is why the first sentence starts with 'saw' but the other verbs are 'fall' and 'break'.