Generally 'see' versus Specifically 'watch'?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Generally 'see' versus Specifically 'watch'?
Somebody asked me out of the blue recently if I had watched a programme on TV ('Did you watch blahblahblah last night?'). Wouldn't 'see' be the more usual/less "marked" choice of word? ('Watch' seems to have a slightly too "assumptive", '[So,] ...after all, and just like I did' air about it, to my ear).
I think, for Americans at least, watch is an appropriate verb for a TV show because a TV and all its programs are assumed to be in your home. We don't say, "have you watched the new movie Avatar?" because there is an assumption that you must go to a theater to watch. So, when we say, "Let's see a movie tomorrow." or "I saw a great movie this weekend" there is some implication or assumption that it wasn't on TV.
People do frequently use "see" for TV programs, but we rarely use "watch" to talk about theater movies, e.g. "She wants to see a movie, but I just want to watch some DVDs." Modern culture assumes most people spend their time at home in front of the boob tube idiot box. In small Chinese cities, many restaurants will have TVs, sometimes in private rooms. Diners don't necessarily watch the programs, but the TVs stay on.
People do frequently use "see" for TV programs, but we rarely use "watch" to talk about theater movies, e.g. "She wants to see a movie, but I just want to watch some DVDs." Modern culture assumes most people spend their time at home in front of the boob tube idiot box. In small Chinese cities, many restaurants will have TVs, sometimes in private rooms. Diners don't necessarily watch the programs, but the TVs stay on.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Thanks for the reply Ouyang! I guess I just like 'see' generally, though 'watch' doesn't faze me too much as an inform (for TV or cinema stuff), and is obviously the verb of choice for past progressive "backgrounding" (I was watching X-Factor when the phone rang...; *I was seeing X-Factor... (but 'I was seeing who'd won X-Factor...', in the sense of 'checking', would be OK)).
-
woodcutter
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 6:14 am
- Location: London
I'd say that "watch" is in a less passive subset of "see", so that is why the latter is a more common question about the TV (though both are common), because we are not usually interested in the level of intent in the viewing.
(e.g we don't "watch" an advert, but see it)
Although we say see a movie, and this requires a lot of intent, I think that is because "see" can include the action of moving to something in order to see it.
(e.g we don't "watch" an advert, but see it)
Although we say see a movie, and this requires a lot of intent, I think that is because "see" can include the action of moving to something in order to see it.
Just personally.
Interesting question.
I would always ask "Did you watch..." for regular shows (series, mini-series, sit-coms, etc). For movies, one-offs, the news, adverts, and also for a new series, "Did you see..."
And then there's comments on changes, etc, in shows, like "Did you see what they did to (character's name) in (TV show's name)?" Though that seems to be a different concept altogether, I think.
I would always ask "Did you watch..." for regular shows (series, mini-series, sit-coms, etc). For movies, one-offs, the news, adverts, and also for a new series, "Did you see..."
And then there's comments on changes, etc, in shows, like "Did you see what they did to (character's name) in (TV show's name)?" Though that seems to be a different concept altogether, I think.