In a sentence like, "I saw him run," what is the rule that explains why "run" is in the present tense when "saw" is in the past tense? A similar construction, "She said he swam," requires past tense for both. I suspect the pronoun is governing verb tense. Is there a term for this?
Learn English – “I saw him run” — Why doesn’t this require the past tense of “run”
past-tensepresent-tensetenses
Related Solutions
First note: In Modern English questions are formed by inverting the subject and the first auxiliary verb (the operator) to create question syntax: You have been looking for a job--> Have you been looking for a job?
The role of 'do': If no auxiliary verb is apparent, we add an operator--the verb 'do'--and inflect it for number/tense as appropriate. It is then inverted with the subject: You found a job--> Did you find a job? He reads the help wanted ads--> Does he read the help wanted ads? Notice that the main verbs here ('find' and 'read') are not in the present tense as you imagined, but are simply base forms of the verb. The tense is carried by your operator, the auxiliary verb appearing as do/does/did.
The OED has this usage back to 1849 so it's been around a while. It says that it comes from omitting have and is "colloquial":
b. The pa. pple. [past participle] is also used colloq. with omission of (I) have. Cf. gotcha n., gotta v.
1849 Knickerbocker 34 12 They got no principles. They got no platform to stand onto.
1857 Quinland I. 1 Got an hour to spare—thought I'd just run in and see what you were all about.
1884 ‘M. Twain’ Adventures Huckleberry Finn xxxviii. 325 We got to dig in like all git-out.
1887 M. E. Wilkins Humble Romance 370 What you got there, grandma?
1911 R. D. Saunders Col. Todhunter i. 11 Oh, of course, you got to laugh at me.
1911 J. F. Wilson Land Claimers ix. 118 But I got several plans, and I need ye.
1941 P. F. Webster & D. Ellington (title of song) I got it bad and that ain't good.
1967 L. White Crimshaw Memorandum (1968) v. 93 Gawd knows I got enough problems.
EDIT: I don't have evidence, so I didn't originally include it in my answer, but my suspicion is that:
In US informal registers, got seems to have been re-interpreted as a present-tense verb form just meaning "have, possess". It sure behaves that way. It's homophonous with, but not identical to, the past tense of get. Historically it seems to have been a resultative construction, but it acts like a normal verb now.
The only issue is if so, then the verb's defective in the 3sg: both "he/she/it got" and "he/she/it gots" are highly marked and are just avoided in most dialects. In response to Betty's inquiry, I'm not sure sure if people just say "he/she/it's got" or if we reword to avoid the issue.
Again, I got no evidence; it's just a pet theory for now.
Best Answer
Hear, see, watch, notice and similar verbs of perception can be followed by object + infinitive without to or object + -ing form.
There is usually a difference of meaning between the two structures.
The infinitive is used after these verbs when we want to say that we hear or see the whole of an action or event. The gerund –ing form is used to suggest that we hear an action or event in progress.
The verbs see, hear, watch, notice etc., can also be followed by an object + past participle.
In this case, the past participle has a passive meaning.
I heard his name repeated several times. (= His name was repeated several times.)