Try and reunite the kids with their families

Question

Grennan and Farid Ait-Mansour, a fellow volunteer, soon discovered that even though the war had ended in 2006, child trafficking was ongoing. As a result, thousands of village children were living in Kathmandu, adandoned and forgotten. Both men agreed that the best solution was to try and reunite the kids with their families.

HI,

Is it right to understand "try and reunite" in the above as "try to reunite?" Thanks.

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,

Yes. The form 'try and do something ' is very common in casual English.

Clive

Canadian45 · Answer

AngliholicBoth men agreed that the best solution was to try and reunite the kids with their families.

HI, is it right to understand "try and reunite" in the above as "try to reunite?" Thanks.
I would only say "try to reunite".

"try and reunite" makes no sense at all. It's logical meaning is 'try to reunite and reunite', which again makes no sense.

Regards · Answer

canadian45I would only say "try to reunite".
"try and reunite" makes no sense at all. It's logical meaning is 'try to reunite and reunite', which again makes no sense.

Hi,

No. It means the same as try to reunite. It's commonly used in spoken English. And it does make sense, at

least to me.

Regards

Canadian45 · Answer

Regards[quote user="canadian45"]

I would only say "try to reunite". "try and reunite" makes no sense at all. It's logical meaning is 'try to reunite and reunite', which again makes no sense.

Hi,No. It means the same as try to reunite. It's commonly used in spoken English. I have no doubt that it's commonly used and that it is meant to mean 'try to reunite'.

But whether it makes sense or not is where we differ.

"try and reunite" logically means 'first try to reunite and then reunite', and that would, in retrospect, only be true if the person in fact succeeds in reuniting. But since we obviously can't know in advance whether the person will succeed or not, only 'try to reunite' makes sense to me.

Regards
c45

Regards · Answer

canadian45"try and reunite" logically means 'first try to reunite and then reunite', and that would, in retrospect, only be true if the person in fact succeeds in reuniting. But since we obviously can't know in advance whether the person will succeed or not, only 'try to reunite' makes sense to me.
c45

Hi,

It seems to me that you're having trouble with this phrase because you're applying unjustified logic to it.

I certainly don't judge the meaning here by virtue of its ambiguity, as you described nicely.

The structure try and do something is a matter of grammar, pure and simple. It doesn't have to do with

semantics. Likewise, this structure means the same as try to do something which is widely used

in everyday speech. Unfortunately, your reasoning, then, seems to me misguided.

Regards

CalifJim · Answer

Here's an interesting factoid that I discovered years ago.

Some foreign language texts for students of English teach the "try and" construction as an exception to "try to", which foreign students expect. They actually tell their students to substitute 'and' for the expected 'to' in the phrase "try ___ [verb]".

Somebody must think it's standard practice in English.

CJ

Regards · Answer

Hi,

Sorry, CJ, but I can't see the point here somehow.

Regards

Canadian45 · Answer

RegardsHi,It seems to me that you're having trouble with this phrase because you're applying unjustified logic to it. I don't know why you feel the logic is unjustified. Language is not just vocabulary, grammar and idioms. Logic and common sense in a language are virtues that make the language easier to understand and learn.

I certainly don't judge the meaning here by virtue of its ambiguity, as you described nicely. But "try and reunite" cannot justify its ambiguity by, for example, claiming 'idiom status' which it is not.

I guess the bottom line is why anyone would say or justify "try and reunite" when "try to reunite" is obviously better.

Of course when a student asks about the two phrases we should say that both are used. We can then comment further as we wish.

The structure try and do something is a matter of grammar, pure and simple. It doesn't have to do with semantics. Why shouldn't it have to do with semantics? Again, it's not an idiom. It's just inferior English, in my opinion. (no matter how common it is)

Likewise, this structure means the same as try to do something which is widely used in everyday speech. Unfortunately, your reasoning, then, seems to me misguided. That's a matter of opinion and something we disagree on.
c45

Regards · Answer

Hi,

It's indeed not an idiom, but it has become idiomatic throughout the years. I suspect you're

trying to justify yourself, but you don't have to. I didn't say that language was concerned

with vocabulary, grammar and idioms only. As things stand, this structure sounds reasonable

as it is, regardless of whether it is ambiguous or not. I'm sensible of the fact that it is not an idiom.

However, it doesn't have to do with semantics because we're not talking about semantics;

it's pure grammar. I appreciate this is a matter on which we disagree, and therefore I will leave it at that.

Regards

Canadian45 · Answer

I am sorry to drag this out further, but I felt that I had to respond to some of your comments.

Hopefully this will be my last post on this thread.

RegardsHi,
It's indeed not an idiom, but it has become idiomatic throughout the years. I think it's just casual nonstandard English, as other posters have also indicated.
I suspect you're
trying to justify yourself, but you don't have to. justify what? I am just pointing that 'try to verb' is clearly superior.

I didn't say that language was concerned
with vocabulary, grammar and idioms only. As things stand, this structure sounds reasonable
as it is, regardless of whether it is ambiguous or not. But why do you choose to so vigorously defend something that you admit is ambiguous when there is a superior alternative? I'm sensible of the fact that it is not an idiom.
However, it doesn't have to do with semantics because we're not talking about semantics; I disagree! We are exactly talking about using words that do or do not mean what we want them to mean.

it's pure grammar I don't know what you mean by "pure grammar". But since you mention it, 'try to verb' is standard correct grammar.

quote]

c45

Try and reunite the kids with their families

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions