# Miałabym komu rzucać kijek



## Baltic Sea

Hello all users!

My wife regularly practises Nordic Walking each morning except Sundays. When in our Spa Park, she usually meets a few people with their dogs. Among them is one lady with her dog called Tabs (maybe Taps). She would usually throw a/the stick for him. Because my wife had not seen Tabs for quite a long time, she started to miss him. On one occasion she said to me: I wish Tabs were back. I would have someone to throw a/the stick for.
Does _*I would have someone to throw a/the stick for*_ in English mean the same as *Miałabym komu rzucać kijek* in Polish?
Thank you. The source: imagination.


----------



## LilianaB

I would say: _To throw a stick for_. Please be careful -- it can apparently kill the dog, in the worse scenario, or damge his health, at least


----------



## Baltic Sea

Thank you, LilianaB. Does _*I would have someone to throw a stick for*_ sound good to you?


----------



## LilianaB

I would personally say: I would have someone throw a stick for him. (or her).


----------



## Baltic Sea

Thank you. Is my version undertandable?


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, it is understandable, but I personally would not use a regular infinitive here. You could wait for more opinions.


----------



## Baltic Sea

Thank you, LilianaB. I will wait for more comments.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Nie rozumiem na czym polega problem. zarówno czasownik dokonany jak i niedokonany można użyć w takim zdaniu, w zależności .od tego, co ma się na mysli


----------



## dreamlike

I think your initial sentence is fine, I think that's what I'd be most likely to say.


----------



## Szkot

LilianaB said:


> I would personally say: I would have someone throw a stick for him. (or her).



That suggests you want someone else to throw the stick for the dog, rather than do it yourself.


----------



## dreamlike

Yes, but I gather that were we to remove the 'him' bit, it would be just fine, right?


----------



## Szkot

No, you need to say 'to throw', as in Mr Sea's original sentence.


----------



## dreamlike

Oh, I failed to notice it's missing. Right.


----------



## LilianaB

Szkot said:


> That suggests you want someone else to throw the stick for the dog, rather than do it yourself.



Of sure, definitely. In the second sentence someone else is the person to perform the act of throwing. I thought this was what Baltic wanted in his second sentence -- to express that he will ask, or pay somebody, to throw a stick for the dog. Regarding the infinitive -- what I meant is that I would use a bare infinitive here, rather than a regular infinitive (if we talk about a third party performing the action).  Yes, in a constructions *I would have someone to talk to*, *something to do*, you definitely need *to*. I slightly misunderstood his intentions -- I thought, for some reason, it was a new sentence since I answered the part related to the original sentence already and only a part of the sentence was repeated -- only the second clause.                    

Doesn't the whole sentence from the original post sound slightly awkward in English? There must be a better way to express this idea in real life. *I wish the dog were here so I would have someone to throw the stick for?* It is grammtically correct but seems slightly awkward. It might be Ok, in fact,  -- just a rare statement.


----------



## radosna

I think that it would be more accurate to say, "I would have someone to throw a/the stick _to_."  You're not throwing the stick _for_ the dog. You're throwing the stick _to_ the dog.

Technically, it's not grammatically correct to end a sentence with the word "to" or "for", but not many people would actually say something like, "I would have someone to whom I would throw a stick." More likely, we'd simply say, "I'd have someone to throw a stick to."

(I hope I haven't misunderstood you.  My apologies if I have.)


----------



## LilianaB

Yes, I agree. _To_ sounds nicer for some reason -- it implies playing with the dog, rather than just treating him like an object. However, in many articles, mostly British, related to dog injuries as a result of a stick being thrown to/for them, _for_ is mostly used. It may be the BE/AE difference. I would naturally say _throw  the stick to the dog_, but I did not really want to confuse Baltic anymore since _for_ is often used and he speaks BE I think.


----------



## Baltic Sea

Thank you all very much for helpful information. Although I am open to AE, I do my best to try and speak British English properly. I know I am far from perfect.


----------

