Someone from the ABS-CBN network itself called my attention to a November 4 story on the abs-cbnnews.com website, “Speaker defends lawmakers watching Pacquiao fight,” and made the following comment:
“Writer does not seem to know the difference between ‘watch’ and ‘see’ the fight.”
I read the entire news story to see if any grammar or usage problem indeed justifies this supposition, and I am quoting verbatim below the portions of the story that make the usage in question (all underscoring mine):
Speaker defends lawmakers watching Pacquiao fight MANILA - House Speaker Prospero Nograles Jr. defended Wednesday the decision of some Filipino congressmen
to watch the November 14 fight between People's Champ Manny Pacquiao and Puerto Rican pugilist Miguel Cotto in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Nograles, who is in the United States, said lawmakers who
will watch the fight live will only miss one session day in Congress. Earlier reports said at least 20 Filipinos congressmen
may watch the fight in Los Angeles…
The House Speaker confirmed that he would be staying in the US until the weekend
to watch the fight live…
[Malacanang’s Lorelei] Fajardo said she was not aware of any member of the Cabinet watching the fight. It was not also clear whether First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo, a huge Pacquiao fan, would go to Las Vegas.
MY CRITIQUE OF THIS STORY’S USAGE OF THE VERB “WATCH”: Offhand I will say that I find nothing grammatically wrong with the newswriter’s choice of the verb “watch” instead of “see.” I must acknowledge, of course, that many journalists indeed tend to use these two verbs interchangeably—sometimes wrongly at that—but in this particular case, “watch” is definitely the correct word choice.
IMAGE CREDIT: HARRY’S BLOG, ENGLISHLESSONVIASKYPE.COM Many of us tend to think of “see” and “watch”—and “look” as well—as practically synonymous and interchangeable words for the act of observing, but they really are not. The difference between them is, as we were taught early in grammar school, whether the act of observing is
intended or
unintended. When we “see” something, we normally don’t intend to do so; the action is involuntary—it just happens that we do it, as in “I got out of the car and
saw a snake.” In contrast, when we “watch” something, the action is intentional; we really intend to do it and we do it quite intensely because what we “watch” usually moves, as in “I
watched her dance all night.” Then, when we “look” at something, we purposively direct our attention at it, as in “I
looked at the records and was convinced that she was telling the truth.”
In the modern idiom, however, the distinction between “watch” and “see” appears to be fading. It has become acceptable to say “We
saw a movie last night” instead of “We
watched a movie last night,” and to say “We
saw that play on Broadway last year” instead of “We
watched that play on Broadway last year.” Thankfully, “look” hasn’t insinuated itself as much for that same meaning in most educated circles; otherwise, we’d be dealing with such a messy sense triumvirate.
Anyway, I’m almost sure that this idiomatic blurring of the distinction between “watch” and “see” is what prompted that comment about the ABS-CBN news story that the “Writer does not seem to know the difference between ‘watch’ and ‘see’ the fight.” Indeed, so strongly has the verb “see” encroached into “watch” territory that there are now staunch grammar partisans for its usage in such cases.
In the news story in question, however, it doesn’t look like “see” semantically works as well as “watch.” Try substituting “see” for “watch” in the sentences in question and read the sentences aloud; do it now for good measure. In situations like this, playing it by ear can often lead us to the semantically better word choice.
Wrong tense usage for “watch” in the news story Even if the ABS-CBN newswriter correctly chose the verb “watch” for that news story, however, he or she used the wrong tense for it twice.
The first wrong tense usage is in the headline itself, “Speaker defends lawmakers
watching Pacquiao fight.” As we know, this headline is the ellipted or shortened form of the statement “Speaker defends lawmakers who
will be watching the Pacquiao fight,” where the verb “watch” is in the future progressive tense. In the ellipted form, however, the auxiliary verbs “will” and “be” (and the article “the” as well) are done away with, yielding the stand-alone progressive-tense verb “watching.” This creates the false impression that the “watching” is happening now and not something still to happen in the future—a construction that could throw off those not familiar with the unique grammar of news headlines.
In headline-writing, though, this problem with tense can sometimes be “cured” by supplying a future time frame for the “watching,” as in “Speaker defends lawmakers
watching Nov. 15 Pacquiao fight” or “Speaker defends lawmakers
watching Pacquiao’s Nov. 15 fight.” This has the effect of canceling the present progressive tense of the headline statement, giving it the sense of the future tense that it needs. In practice, however, headline writers often do away with this refinement in tense either due to space limitations or laziness, or both.
The second misuse of tense for “watch” is a more serious one. Look:
“(Malacanang’s Lorelei) Fajardo said she was not aware of any member of the Cabinet
watching the fight.”
This time, the use of the progressive-tense “watching” is inexcusably erroneous; the writer could no longer invoke the peculiar logic of headline constructions to justify the grammar error. Those Cabinet members aren’t watching the Pacquiao-Cotto fight yet! That sentence therefore needs to be corrected to yield a future-tense sense for “watching,” as follows:
“(Malacanang’s Lorelei) Fajardo said she was not aware of any member of the Cabinet who
will watch the fight.”
Forcing the progressive tense of verbs double up for the future tense may be forgivable in news headlines, but it’s a serious grammar and semantic travesty in the story proper itself!
Boning up on the usage of “watch,” “see,” and “look”This may look somewhat elementary, but for a much better feel and grasp of the usage of the sense verbs “watch,” “see,” and “look,” I strongly recommend that everyone take the following self-test by UsingEnglish.com:
Practice Test on “Watch,” “See,” and “Look” Choose the correct answer:Q1 – He’s very shy and doesn’t ____ you in the eye.
(a) watch
(b) look
(c) see
Q2 - Did you ____ the advertising in the newspaper?
(a) see
(b) watch
Q3 - I can’t ____ much in this light.
(a) look
(b) watch
(c) see
Q4 - The police are _____ the house in case the criminals come back.
(a) looking at
(b) watching
Q5 - I spent the evening ____ TV.
(a) seeing
(b) looking at
(c) watching
Q6 - ____ out! There’s some water on the floor.
(a) Look
(b) See
Q7 - Did you ____ the football game last night?
(a) look at
(b) watch
Q8 - I ____ in the shop window, but I didn’t see anything I liked.
(a) looked
(b) saw
(c) watched
Q9 - I can’t ____ any milk in the fridge.
(a) see
(b) look
(c) watch
Q10 – I’ve never liked it—I don't know what you____ in it.
(a) look
(b) watch
(c) see
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 UsingEnglish.com- All rights reservedIf you scored 8 correct or higher, your visual sense grammar is doing great!
Answer Key: Click to open the attachment giving the answers to this test. (Requires registration)
NOTE: The attachment button appears only if you have logged in as a registered member. If you are not a member yet, simply register now and log in again. Registration is absolutely free.
