# to try and find out



## mastercrack

I was prying into a grammar guide when I found this sentence:

_We are staying with John *to try and find out* if his place really is haunted.

_Is it the same as saying "to try to find out"? I'm looking forward to hear from your reply  

Thank you in advance


----------



## Bevj

Yes, in my opinion they are interchangeable.


----------



## Loob

Yes, it's the same - but we often (in the present tense) use "try and " instead of "try to".


----------



## mastercrack

Oh, I understand, Is it more common in british english than in american? Is it the same? thanks for answering so quickly


----------



## gramman

It's fairly common in what I think of as informal conversational AE. I find it very annoying and, as this page from grammarhome.com ("Try to" vs. "Try and") observes, always wrong. An article published on theguardian.com (10 grammar rules you can forget: how to stop worrying and write proper) offers a different perspective and addresses your question about AE-BrE differences:





> _Try to_ has traditionally been regarded as more "correct" and _try and_ as a  colloquialism or worse. The former is certainly more formal, and far  more common in writing, but it's the other way round when it comes to  speech. Those who regard _try and_ as an "Americanism" will be  disappointed to learn that it is much more widely used in the UK than in  the US. Sometimes there is a good case for _try and_ – for example, if  you want to avoid repeating the word to in a sentence such as: "We're  really going to _try and_ win this one."


I will try TO find time to read about those TEN rules. They may help me to write properLY.


----------



## Parla

In my opinion, both "try to" and "try and" are acceptable.

P.S.: Nationalities and names of languages are always capitalized: British, English, American, etc.


----------



## DonnyB

I would go along with the suggestion here that in BE "try and" is the more common of the two.  I might remember to use "try to" in semi-formal writing, but probably not otherwise.


----------



## gramman

If someone says, "I'm going to try to read that book," I'm confident I know what it meant by that. If I'm told, "I'm going to try and read that book," I'm left wondering if the person is saying that:

an attempt will be made to perform some unspecified action, and 
the book will be read.


----------



## mastercrack

Wow, It is now quite clear. Thank you so much, everyone.


----------



## Miss Julie

How can you try _and_ do something? You're either trying _or_ doing.

You *try to* do something. The "_try and_" construction is substandard, and its use--while widespread--shouldn't be encouraged.


----------



## Loob

Miss Julie said:


> ...
> 
> You *try to* do something. The "_try and_" construction is substandard, and its use--while widespread--shouldn't be encouraged.


I disagree, Miss Julie: it seems perfectly "standard" to me, in some tenses.

That said, it doesn't work at all in the past tense: _I tried and go_


----------



## Miss Julie

Loob said:


> I disagree, Miss Julie: it seems perfectly "standard" to me, in some tenses.
> 
> That said, it doesn't work at all in the past tense: _I tried and go_



I'm sorry you feel that way because "try and" is totally illogical. You're either trying OR doing...not both!


----------



## Loob

You have "logic" on your side, Miss J - I have "idiom" on mine


----------



## PaulQ

Parla said:


> In my opinion, both "try to" and "try and" are acceptable.


  

In Gramman's link to the Guardian, it is noted: 





> *10 Try and try again*
> Try to has traditionally been  regarded as more "correct" and try and as a colloquialism or worse.  ... Sometimes there is a good  case for try and – for example, if you want to avoid repeating the word  to in a sentence such as: "We're really going to try and win this one."


Note the phrase: "has traditionally been  regarded as more "correct"" - this gives no indication as to whether it *is* correct or not. 

I see try and <bare infinitive> as an idiom: hence it being more common in speech. As it is common in speech, then it is part of the language and thus, as correct as the "try to" version.

I think we must be careful and/to describe the language as it is, and not as we might like it to be.

(crosspost with Loob's idiom: idioms trump grammar.)


----------



## Miss Julie

"_Gonna_" is an idiom and part of the language, but we don't encourage people to use it!


----------



## Loob

Miss Julie said:


> "_Gonna_" is an idiom and part of the language, but we don't encourage people to use it!


"Gonna" isn't an idiom, Miss J - it's reflection of how people often pronounce the phrase "going to".

"I'm going to try and see X" is an idiomatic way of saying "I'm going to try to see X": I see no reason to discourage people from using it....


----------



## sdgraham

As you can see from the above, our British friends are wedded to their 'try and."

Since we have no designated authority of the English language, the debate could on forever. In other words, we have no august body to tell us whether a certain term is idiom or idiocy.

People who are accustomed to using a phrase while immersed in a sea of similar usage are not likely to accept comments that it's nonsense or incorrect or whatever.

I can affirm that it's *not* acceptable in the U.S. newspaper world and looks odd to most of us ex-colonists. Generally the issue does not ever arise on editing desks on this side of the pond because we seldom see it.

Back when it fell to me to edit some technical papers to be read not only on both sides of the bit water, but by non-native speakers as well, I was constantly excising the thing from documents written by native BE speakers.

We've been around this one before, e.g.

Try And/ Try To
Try first to make ...and then (to) reduce
Try TO do or try AND do? [ verb + and ]
Try to do/try doing/try and do
try to/and

I have no doubt that my treasured BE friends and acquaintances will try and cling to the usage and I'll try to ignore it.


----------



## Loob

sdgraham said:


> As you can see from the above, our British friends are wedded to their 'try and."...


I'm intrigued, sdg - the previous threads seem to indicate that "try and" is just as common in AmE as it is in BrE.


----------



## lucas-sp

I'm with Loob and Paul here - "try and" (or, in speech, "try-hn") is a very common feature of AE.

My advice to a student of English would be: You should expect that you will hear "try and" to mean "try to," so you should learn to recognize it and what it means. If you are writing or speaking in a more formal situation, you should always use "try to," because "try to" is always acceptable.

(For instance, you wouldn't want to attempt to show off your colloquial English by saying "try and" in a job interview, and then find out that it was Miss Julie interviewing you for the position!)


----------



## Loob

Brilliant, lucas!


----------



## gramman

>>idioms trump grammar

That may be, but I'm reluctant to concede that they trump gramma_n_. And I would, without hesitation, lay Mr. Graham, a respected retired journalist, on the table to overtrump the arguments presented here by Tryanders, but I'm concerned that some might get the wrong impression.

>>we have no august body to tell us

Well, that only makes sense, right? Check the calendar, my friend — it's _December_.

>>traditionally … regarded as more "correct" … gives no indication as to whether it *is* correct

Perhaps they were simply seeking to avoid riling the Tryander community — might well hurt sales.


----------



## EStjarn

Loob said:


> That said, it doesn't work at all in the past tense: _I tried and go_



I don't quite see the connection here, Loob. Do you mean that this present tense version would work:_.
He tries and go to the gym three times per week._
.​I had thought that 'try' was an infinitive when used in this construction. For example, the topic sentence:.
present tense: _We *are *staying with John *to try and find out* if his place really *is* haunted.

_future tense: _We *will be* staying with John *to try and find out* if his place really *is* haunted.
_.​Are you saying that the following doesn't work? (If so, I think I can see why.).
past tense: _We *were* staying with John *to try and find out* if his place really *was* haunted.
._​


----------



## Loob

You're absolutely right, EStjarn - I was talking rubbish

For "try and X" to work as an alternative to "try to X", the "try" has to be an infinitive - either a _to_-infinitive ("I'm going to try and go") or a bare infinitive ("I'll try and go"/"I wouldn't try and go"/"I didn't try and go"....) 

Thank you


----------



## DonnyB

Loob said:


> I disagree, Miss Julie: it seems perfectly "standard" to me, in some tenses.
> 
> That said, it doesn't work at all in the past tense: _I tried and go_


You could, however, say "I *used to try and go *to the gym three times a week".  However "substandard" that may sound to some of our AE speakers, it sounds perfectly idiomatic and natural to me.


----------



## Miss Julie

Loob said:


> "Gonna" isn't an idiom, Miss J - it's reflection of how people often pronounce the phrase "going to".
> 
> "I'm going to try and see X" is an idiomatic way of saying "I'm going to try to see X": I see no reason to discourage people from using it....



OK, bad example. _Irregardless_ and _I could care less_ are "idiomatic" and part of the language, but they are also illogical and incorrect, and their use is discouraged (or should be).


----------



## PaulQ

The Google Ngram for *try to ** and *try and ** is interesting CLICK

Both look to be pre-1800: I think we should give both these siblings a home...


----------



## lucas-sp

I took a little stroll to the OED, and look what I found under "try":





> *16.* ​*a.* _intr._ To make an effort, endeavour, attempt. (With _inf._, or _absol._)
> 
> *b.* Followed by _and_ and a coordinate verb (instead of _to_ with inf.) expressing the action attempted. _colloq._ Cf. and _conj.1_ 10.
> 1686   J. S. _Hist. Monastical Convent._ 9   They try and express their love to God by their thankfulness to him.
> 1802   H. Martin _Helen of Glenross_ II. 143   Frances retired, to try and procure a little rest.
> 1819   Moore in _N. & Q._ (1854) 1st Ser. *9* 76/1   Went to the theatre to try and get a dress.
> 
> 
> 1855   in Coleridge _Mem. Keble_ (1869) II. 425,   I have something to write to you on that matter, which I shall try and put on another piece of paper.


So it's "colloquial," but it's "colloquial" dating back to the 17th century.


----------



## gramman

An impassioned appeal to the Tryander community​ 
Someone's dog has run off in an urban neighborhood with a lot of traffic. The owner is driving around hoping to find him before a tragedy ensues, and notices a policeman walking a beat. He stops his car and asks for help. The officer, seeing that the man is distraught, says, without hesitating between sentences, "Sure, I'll try. And get your car started; it's blocking the intersection." The man says, "OK, I'll move my car, but I won't have any trouble starting it. Can you help me find my dog?" The cop replies, "I just said I would." The man is unsure of what he's been told. During the ensuing confusion, the dog is hit by a car and slightly injured. 

This example points to the problems that can develop when people commonly say that they will "_try and do something_." And it could have been much worse — the poor animal could have been killed! Do you really want our beloved pets struck down in the streets because of your preference for some meritless idiom or colloquialism?

Please reconsider your view before more families are torn apart by the loss of a friend and companion.


----------



## lucas-sp

gramman said:


> An impassioned appeal to the Tryander community
> [...]​


So _that's _how Coleridge's dog died! More seriously, misunderstanding is not a special feature of "try and..."; instead, as has been well-established by rhetorical scholars, polysemy (the capacity for language to have multiple meanings) is a fundamental property of all language. All words could cause dog loss when used in real-world contexts.

Just by the way, this isn't exactly an unexpected or isolated use of the word "and." Again from the OED:





> *10. Connecting two verbs, the second of which is logically dependent on the first, esp. where the first verb is come, go, send, or try. Cf. come v. 3d, go v. 32d, send v.1 8b, try v. 16b. Cf alsosure adj. 14. Now colloq. and regional.*
> 
> Except when the first is _come_ or _go_ the verbs in this construction are normally only in the infinitive or imperative.


There are also some interesting examples in that entry:





> 1526   _Bible (Tyndale) _Mark i. f. xliijv,   Whos shue latchett I am not worthy to stoupe doune and vnlose.
> 1599   in _Edinb. B. Rec._ 250   [The council] ordanis the thesaure to trye and speik with Jhonn Kyle.
> 1671   Milton _Paradise Regain'd_ i. 224   At least to try, and teach the erring Soul.
> [...]
> 1959   F. O'Connor _Let._ 20 Nov. in _Habit of Being_ (1980) 359,   I have been wanting to write and thank you for sending back the manuscript.


So, Biblical 16th-century Tryanders roamed once the earth. Later Milton's dog died. I think the example of "to write and thank you" is instructive - nobody would think that "to write" and "to thank" are different actions; the "and" is used to link the two into _one _overall action. The same is true of "to try and teach" in Milton, or in the other examples.

I would say that people who are confused about the meaning of "to try and go to the gym" are in fact confused _about the meaning of the word "and."_ In other words, I'm beginning to re-evaluate my stance from post #19. The more I research it, the more I'm convinced that the claim "'try and do' is incorrect and illogical" is a false conclusion reached through over-correction.


----------



## srk

I think gramman is trying to get a replacement for the Great Think/Thing Row off the ground.

If I have it right, BEers mostly favored "think" as logical but were willing to accept "thing" as established idiom.  Now it's clear why.  They hoped that "try and" would never catch our attention.  Just in case it did, there had to be a clear record of their magnanimity in the other thread.

Edit:  Here's a companion to Paul's Ngram.


----------



## Loob

I've been reflecting on my post 23 in the light of the examples subsequently quoted by lucas, and I've realised that I was wrong to describe usage of "try and" as limited to cases where *try* is an infinitive.

I think it would be better to say that this usage is limited to cases where *try* is the 'plain form'. So as well as "I'm going to try and go"/"I'll try and go" etc, I happily say "Try and get some rest" (imperative) or even "Every morning, the dogs try and wake me up at four o'clock" (third person plural, present tense).  What I can't do, though, is use this where the verb *try* is inflected: I can't say _tries and/tried and/trying and_ instead of _tries to/tried to/trying to_. I think this was what I was trying(), incoherently, to express in my earlier reference to "some tenses".

I, for one, find this limitation really intriguing.

-----

*Later edit*:  Merriam-Webster's _Dictionary of English Usage_ outlines yet more restrictions on the use of "try and":


> If you inflect _try_, insert an adverb, or invert the construction, you will use _try to.
> _[...]
> A negative may precede_ try and, _but if a negative follows _try, to_ is used
> [...]
> These  restrictions give native speakers of English no problem whatever, but  if you are a learner of English, you will want to keep them in  mind.


This probably all goes to underline the importance of  lucas's advice in post 19:





lucas-sp said:


> [...]
> 
> My advice to a student of English would be: You should expect that you  will hear "try and" to mean "try to," so you should learn to recognize  it and what it means. If you are writing or speaking in a more formal  situation, you should always use "try to," because "try to" is always  acceptable.
> 
> [...]


----------



## Thomas Tompion

M-W's list of limitations is accurate, I'd say.  It's perhaps characteristic of WR that we should have some die-hard to-or-nothing enthusiasts as well as other members who acknowledge the general habit, whether or not they regard it as bad.

I too think Lucas's advice to learners is sound, and they shouldn't feel that in following it they will be speaking some stilted form of English.  My mild aversion to the try-and form, causes me to say _try to_ more often than is usual, it seems, for people sometimes tell me they get pleasure from hearing the form.


----------



## gramman

If you search on "attempt and", you find a number of examples where  people use that expression as a sort of substitute for "try and." I'm  thinking that this is a consequence of the familiar use of "try and" and  I'm wondering how Tryanders feel about that. 

I won't offer any  examples, because I'm willing to concede that those using "attempt and"  in this way are not carefully observing "the rules." And I don't mean to  suggest that Tryanders are somehow responsible for this behaviour. (I  figure we are all called to repentance by our own conscience.  )

I'd also like to briefly note that srk's reference to "the  Great Think/Thing Row" brought me to an important realization. When I  first opened this thread, I predictably ran a search on "try to" vs "try  and" and had a typical experience. The use of_ try and_ is:

included by Grammar Girl in her extensive list of pet peeves 
described in a Washington State University emeritus professor's collection of Common Errors in English Usage (which I have found very useful over the years) as "common in colloquial speech" but generally to be avoided in writing 
listed in the Guardian article referenced in this thread as the focus of "a rule you can forget" 
When  Miss Julie revived the thread and, quite appropriately from my  perspective, took a firm stand against the muddled thinking that forms  the irrational, illogical, and unthinking basis of Tryanderism, I  decided to take more than a cursory glance at this issue. I found that,  like Think/Thing, try to/and is the subject of a great many online  discussions. In my view, some are worth reading, but many are not. The  very thoughtful contributions made to this thread since my lame attempts  at humour in post #21 and continuing through my more recent "injured  dog" story have made me realize that I've been disrespectful to those  who would read this WRF document to gather information. I will seek to  apply this somewhat sobering experience to my future participation in  the forum.


----------



## velisarius

Anyone upset by the use of "try and" in the present tense could do worse than to try and read _Oldest Living Confederate Widow Tells All, _the novel by Allan Gurganus. The narrator, an old lady born c. 1885, and married at 15, uses such horrors as "I tried and see", "his recently trying and lure my babies", throughout the book. I'm sure Mr. Gurganis has done his due diligence and this was in fact a feature of certain folks' speech in North Carolina at the time, but it's a bit annoying. In comparison, plain old "try and do something" seems perfectly normal to me, but only in spoken English.

I might even say that there is a difference between "try and " and "try to". 
"Try to get all your homework finished by the time I get back." (Make an effort to do this, though I realise it may not be possible.)
"Try and mend this broken lamp for me, will you?" (Please find the time to do this thing; I know you are capable of it.


----------



## Hakkar

Hi, since my thread was closed I need to re-open this one, as I would like to ask a question: I am wondering about the usage of "and" before infinitives so I have searched on Google random verbs with and postponed and I've seen interesting results: think and do, seek and do, and so on. Now, I would like to ask if there is a set rule, and by that I mean if one could just replace "to" with "and" with ALL verbs with just a slight difference in meaning, or if this replacement is restricted to fixed expressions only like the one in this thread (but this would not explain the 700 thousand results on google). Thank you in advance.


----------



## owlman5

"I'll try and do it" is a colloquial version of "I'll try to do it".  You can apply that general principle to most or all of the other verbs you find on Google that follow this pattern.


----------



## velisarius

Please give an example sentence where you have found other verbs that follow the same pattern - for example where did you find a sentence that has "think and do" instead of "think to do", or "seek and do" instead of "seek to do"?


----------



## mplsray

On the subject of _try and,_ Kenneth G. Wilson has the following to say in _The Columbia Guide to Standard American English:_



> try and
> For generations, commentators have criticized _try and._ as in _I'll try and see her tomorrow,_ preferring _try to_ in such constructions. Both have been in constant use throughout the period, however, and the main difference is that _try and_ is almost always limited to Casual and Impromptu levels and their written imitations, whereas _try to_ is Standard, appropriate at all levels.



Casual, Impromptu, and Standard are capitalized because they refer to the particular definition of those usage labels given by Wilson in his book. All three can be used by standard speakers, with the first two being part of informal standard English. Casual is less formal than Impromptu, with, as an example, "Borrow your pencil?" being used instead of "May I borrow your pencil?" Informal is a step up in formality: "It is the face-to-face language you use speaking to the store clerk, to your child's teacher, or to strangers at the bus stop."

Addition: Other entries give cross references to _try and,_ including, without comment, _be sure and, come and_, _sure and,_ and _take and_. Besides giving a cross reference to _try and_, the entry _go and_ identifies it as an "emphatic use of _go_ that puts the stress on a second verb that follows...." It is identified as being Conversational and Impromptu, where Conversational is a synonym for Colloquial and includes the speech of standard speakers.


----------



## Chasint

mplsray said:


> ...Addition: Other entries give cross references to _try and,_ including, without comment, _be sure and, come and_, _sure and,_ and _take and_. Besides giving a cross reference to _try and_, the entry _go and_ identifies it as an "emphatic use of _go_ that puts the stress on a second verb that follows...." It is identified as being Conversational and Impromptu, where Conversational is a synonym for Colloquial and includes the speech of standard speakers.


Surely "go and <verb>" is merely an instruction to do two things in sequence.

"Go and clean your room!"  means, "Go to your room and then clean it."  If the person was already in the room one would simply say, "Clean your room!"

"Come and look!" means, "Approach me and then look". If the person is standing next to you, you would simply say, "Look!"

I think these latter examples are entirely unrelated to the thread topic and that Wilson is mistaken.


----------



## mplsray

Biffo said:


> Surely "go and <verb>" is merely an instruction to do two things in sequence.
> 
> "Go and clean your room!"  means, "Go to your room and then clean it."  If the person was already in the room one would simply say, "Clean your room!"
> 
> I think these latter examples are entirely unrelated to the thread topic and that Wilson is mistaken.



Here is the entry in question:



> go and
> is an emphatic use of _go_ that puts the stress on a second verb that follows, as in _She went and told her mother;_
> _He'll go and spill the beans, I'm afraid._ We also use it for the same purpose without _and: Go fly a kite!_ With and
> without _and_, the locution occurs mostly in Conversational use or its Informal imitations.



I'm inclined to agree with Wilson: It's putting emphasis on the second verb. "He'll spill the beans" is weaker than "He'll go and spill the beans." It is certainly not necessary to imagine the person actually going anywhere: _She went and told her mother _could equally be used when she did not physically move a step. Compare "She up and told her mother." Wilson has a separate entry for "up and" which cross-references _go and_ and _try and._


----------



## Chasint

mplsray said:


> ..._She went and told her mother _could equally be used when she did not physically move a step._.._


That's an interesting example. I see what you are getting at. 

There are two different idioms for "go and"

1. "Go and tell your brother that lunch is ready."   (Sequential command - requires physical movement.)

2. "He's gone and done it again."  (Emphasis of second verb. Doesn't necessarily involve spatial displacement.)

I'd be interested to see an example of emphasis without movement that works for "come and".  I can't think of one.


----------



## velisarius

It's in the nature of the verbs "come" and "go" to involve movement. I don't think it's productive to discuss the idiomatic use "he goes and does it again, since no one would expect to hear "he goes to do it again".

The reason "come" and "go" seem to be in a class with "try" is that one would expect "come to eat", rather than "come and eat" since it expresses purpose. One would expect "I'll go to open the door" rather than "I'll go and open the door".
I have seen many learners very puzzled by this usage, and they insist that it's more logical to say "come to eat your breakfast".

 Another similar expression where we can use "to" or "and" is with "be sure": "be sure to lock the door" / "be sure and lock the door". There are probably others.


----------



## gramman

velisarius said:


> No one would expect to hear "he goes to do it again".



I think you might in AE.
"So _he goes to do it again_. And next shot, he lips out. It was freaky." — "View from the mountain top," _Golf Digest_, June 2006

"If _he goes to do it again_, repeat the word "Heal" and pull his head back up …" — "My dog keeps crying," a thread on askmehelpdesk.com​


----------



## velisarius

Sorry I wasn't very clear gramman. I meant "he goes and does it again" is an idiom - maybe a particularly British idiom to express a sort of exasperation - "Oh no, he's gone and done it again - he's upset the moderators."

It seems that "to go to do something " has many nuances, including the one in the above post ("start to") but the one that I was thinking of was "I'll go and let the dog out then", which we (I?) would say rather than "I'll go to let the dog out then".

The additional material in post #38 is interesting: 



> Addition: Other entries give cross references to _try and,_ including, without comment, _be sure and, come and_, _sure and,_ and _take and_. Besides giving a cross reference to _try and_, the entry _go and_ identifies it as an "emphatic use of _go_ that puts the stress on a second verb that follows...." It is identified as being Conversational and Impromptu, where Conversational is a synonym for Colloquial and includes the speech of standard speakers.


----------



## velisarius

To try and answer Hakkar's question in post #35, this entry in the Grammarphobia Blog _Try and try Again_ gives examples of other verbs used in a similar way. 
http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2010/03/try-and-try-again.html

Apart from those we have already mentioned, they list:
"be sure and call"
"send and let her know"
"write and thank you"
"mind and get yourself one"


----------



## sound shift

The first of those grammarphobia examples is from 1811, the second from 1887. The last two are from my lifetime. Even so, I don't think I could use any of the four.


----------



## gramman

I'd be comfortable using the first and third. And I must admit, I use _try and_ in conversation. But I shouldn't!  (I try and don't.)


----------

