As long as the grammar is correct, I see no reason to complain about the meaning of a sentence.
If you are looking for a really tough one try with this one: "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorless_green_ideas_sleep_furiously)
Besides, I remember a movie that I saw when I was a child where a scientific and his vehicle are miniaturized and injected in the body of another man (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzkcSwlrdgg). Then the scientific, in order to listen and see what his host sees and also to stablish a comunication with his host, he conects devices from his vehicle to his hosts senses. I can imagine, in this context, that the host, after fainting and not really understanding the science behind that, he asks the scientific: "Can you see what I see?". And then, the scientific would answer: "As soon as you see, I see".
Final joke: "What does say an eye cell to his neighbor cell?" "As soon as you see, I see"
Interesting comments. By the way, "scientific" is an adjective. For the noun denoting the profession, we say "scientist". That strange pronunciation of "ich" like "aich" could be a local variation or affected by the preceding sound. Ich sehe is the independent clause, and one would expect the pronoun to precede the noun, but as "Sobald du siehst", the dependent clause, is the first grammatical element, requiring the next element to be the verb, it seems that the second element rule takes precedence over the independent clause rule.
True, and examples like this are irritating - but I would suggest that this doesn't make them invalid. The more eccentric the sentence, the more one is forced to grasp the meaning of individual words rather than (to some degree) just guessing the overall meaning of the sentence.
From what I remember, the general rule is that the verb is the second grammatical element of the sentence, or the second "slot" of the sentence, not necessarily the second word. (This isn't always true in certain idiomatic cases, for example when answering a question with "Ja" or "Nein" followed by a clause.) For this sentence, the subordinate clause "Sobald du siehst" in its entirety forms the first grammatical element, so the verb "sehe" goes into the second "slot" after the subordinate clause.
Yep, the verb is the last word for subordinate conjunctions.
I'm going to take a stab at this common question...When one action is answering a question about a first action, the second action is the subordinating conjunction. For example, I am learning German because I work in Hamburg. Ich lerne Deutsch, weil ich in Hamburg arbeite. The second action (I work in Hamburg) explains "why" the first action (I am learning German) so usually the verb for that second action would go at the end of the sentence.
Earlier in this lesson, Duolingo asked that I listen to this phrase in German and type what I heard, in German. It gave a translation in that exercise that differs from the translation for this exercise. The first was "As soon as I see you." The second, the correct translation according to Duolingo, is "As soon as you see, I see," which is the literal translation. But is this an idiomatic expression in German that an English speaker should translate as "As soon as I see you?"
As a native English speaker, I would have translated this sentence as "As soon as you see, I will see." However, I typed it in as "As soon as you see, I see" as I wasn't sure if they would see "will" as correct or not. Any translation errors you see, should be reported and they'll look at it to see if they agree or not. Thanks!