For a sentence having 'have' as verb:
Scientists have trained their telescopes on Arp 229, a pair of merging galaxies, and saw stars exploding in numbers far greater than expected.
For the underlined part (of course), do we have to consider the agreement of 'have' verb participle with the first part of the sentence for the second part?
That means, do we have to replace saw with 'have seen' or just 'seen' will be fine?
I presume 'trained' is a continous activity continuing in present, hence 'have' has been used. But justifying using have seen to maintain parallelism doesn't seem right to me. Rather, it has to be that they are still seeing the stars exploding, hence we should use 'have seen' instead of seen. Seen should also do if it is not a continuing activity like 'and met with an accident once in the process' or something like that.
Any comments?
Scientists have trained their telescopes on Arp 229, a pair of merging galaxies, and saw stars exploding in numbers far greater than expected.
For the underlined part (of course), do we have to consider the agreement of 'have' verb participle with the first part of the sentence for the second part?
That means, do we have to replace saw with 'have seen' or just 'seen' will be fine?
I presume 'trained' is a continous activity continuing in present, hence 'have' has been used. But justifying using have seen to maintain parallelism doesn't seem right to me. Rather, it has to be that they are still seeing the stars exploding, hence we should use 'have seen' instead of seen. Seen should also do if it is not a continuing activity like 'and met with an accident once in the process' or something like that.
Any comments?
