Is the following sentence right in any way:

I saw him saying that to the Chairman

instead of the more acceptable

I heard him saying that to the Chairman?

I have a sense that the first sentence focuses more on the action and the second one on the fact, but I am not 100% sure.

| improve this question | | | | |
  • It makes no sense to me. You could say I saw him talking to the Chairman. But if you are referring to something specific which he said, it would have to be 'heard' - unless you are a lip reader! – WS2 Nov 8 '15 at 0:16
  • You can see someone talking from across the room, but generally only hear them if they are next to you. – marcellothearcane Sep 1 '19 at 6:49

Both sentences are grammatical but mean different things. One uses one's eyes to see the images and one's ears to hear the sounds involved in this case.

| improve this answer | | | | |

Both could be used, but it largely depends on the context. Let's say you are a in a court of law as a witness. A prosecutor could ask you:

You just stated you heard him saying that. Did you personally see him (pointing at a defendant) saying that to the Chairman?

You could answer:

Yes, I (personally/in person) saw him saying that to the Chairman.

This conversation might not take place very frequently, but is not impossible.

| improve this answer | | | | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.