Timeline for I’d rather come or go with you
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
33 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 27, 2023 at 17:41 | comment | added | Lambie | @AndyBonner Yes, to your connotional difference: that is exactly what my answer addresses. You know I had a English lady who is well known around here read this and she could not believe the five downvotes. Did you notice this user: user3067860 She's at the office and she would say: "I went to the office" instead of "I came to the office". And that's the kind of poster who downvoted me. Unbelievable. | |
| Nov 27, 2023 at 17:20 | comment | added | Andy Bonner | Good lord, this was an adventure! I would venture to say that this comment thread adventured beyond the OP's interests, but the most relevant bit here is "You wouldn't say 'come with Uncle Harry.'" There's a lot of talk in the comments about "home," but maybe it can be generalized even more broadly: "come" connotes arrival or companionship; "go" connotes departure or separation. Since the OP used "with me," there's very slight connotational difference: "come with me" emphasizes "remain in my company," while "go with me" emphasizes "leave this place along with me." | |
| Jun 27, 2023 at 16:21 | comment | added | Lambie | @JanusBahsJacquet You are imputing things to me that are not true. Please do not do that and also stop with the moralism. | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 14:32 | comment | added | Lambie | Of course, as I have said "come over" is understood and fine colloquially but it is definitely not what linguists describe. And this is not at all bizarre: Listen, John, Terry wants me to go over there and help him with inventory. As for natural choice, that is a matter of opinion. //Also, you say you agree with user3067860 (right?), where exactly? | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 14:22 | comment | added | Lambie | a. Come indicates motion towards {the location at the utterance time, the location at the event time, or the “home base”} of {the speaker or the addressee}. b. Go indicates motion toward a location distinct from the speaker’s location at the utterance time. Fillmore in journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/BLS/… AND bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/… | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 23:41 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | I’m the person who agreed, and I understand usage perfectly fine. Using went in the context given is the only natural choice. Using came would sound completely bizarre. As always, you claim that your completely idiosyncratic usage is the only valid one, despite everyone else telling you you’re wrong. Well, I’ll reiterate it: you’re wrong. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 15:23 | comment | added | Lambie | @user3067860 For the record, you use of "went to the office" when you are at the office talking to someone just silly. Only if you were elsewhere. The person who agreed with you just doesn't understand usage. I really should not fall for these traps. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 19:11 | comment | added | Lambie | @Showsni Mum says "I'm going to the shops now, you should stay here and do your homework." Johnny says "I'd rather come/go with you." The mother is going away from where she is and Johnny is coming with her on foot or in the car or on the bus etc. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 18:08 | comment | added | Lambie | @JanusBahsJacquet "Unlike some languages, English does not distinguish come/go by the speaker’s actual location, but by the location of the subject at the moment which is notionally emphasised in the utterance.". It's the speaker location, real or in the mind, and directionality of the action. By the way, aller/venir//go/come//ir/venir//ir/vir Portuguese, French and Spanish for go and come. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:59 | comment | added | Lambie | @user3067860 If you are at the office, and you don't say came to the office to anyone (like on the phone or to a colleague). It sounds really, really weird. It's just not right in this case at all. Ask anybody. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:54 | comment | added | user3067860 | @Lambie No, I would never say came there, because no one in that conversation cares about my position in relation to the office, they only care about my position in relation to home. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:44 | comment | added | Lambie | @user3067860 According to you, you are at the office. ERGO: Speaker 1: "I can drop this package off at your house." Interlocutor: "Oh, sorry, I'm not actually home right now, I came to the office today." That is very basic here. went just doesn't work there. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:41 | comment | added | user3067860 | @Lambie I can't be at home to receive the package, because I went to the office--I am in the office now. I "went" from home. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:41 | comment | added | Lambie | English speakers actually say all sorts of things. I criticize no one's actual speech. However, when I am asked about the difference between go and come, I feel obliged to say what they are. And not just reproduce colloquial speech. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:39 | comment | added | Lambie | @TheZ There's a difference between being accurate and being prescriptivist. The Spanish have a really rude way of saying I could care less about that. The problem is that many linguists have two issues: Not listening well and misunderstanding what prescriptivism really is. This question is not about grammar. It is about basic meaning. And the fact one thing can be understood as another in some cases. But that's not the way to answer the OP's question, is it? | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:35 | comment | added | Lambie | @user3067860 You must be trying to introduce some levity. Of course, "I went to the office today" i,e, away from where I am now. Ok, I'm done here. :) | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:35 | comment | added | The Z | Language and meaning are descriptive of people's usage. They aren't prescriptions. If English speakers commonly say something that seems to violate a rule, it's the rule that is a bad description of English, not the speakers that are wrong. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:34 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | Yes, it’s a pragmatics question, and it is perfectly fine, grammatically, pragmatically, semantically and in every other way to use come/go in the way I have described above. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:31 | comment | added | Lambie | @JanusBahsJacquet But this is not a grammar question. It's a pragmatics question, a question of meaning, basic semantics. No one is disputing the grammar. What an idea. Tons of things are grammatical while pragmatically and semantically off. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:27 | history | edited | Lambie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 569 characters in body
|
| May 30, 2023 at 17:27 | comment | added | user3067860 | "I can drop this package off at your house." "Oh, sorry, I'm not actually home right now, I went to the office today." Neither of the speakers are at the house. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:25 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | Come/go are like bring/take in that both pairs consist of a source-oriented verb and a goal-oriented verb, yes. But your claim that the entire Anglosphere is ‘misusing’ them (and have been for centuries) by using them exactly as English grammars describe is bizarre. It is not misuse. You may not use them like that, but everyone else does, because that’s how they work in English. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:23 | comment | added | Lambie | And by the way I am a dyed-in-the-wool native speaker of English. Thank you. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:22 | comment | added | Lambie | @JanusBahsJacquet The reason that "I want you to come home early tonight" works even if both speaker and interlocutor are away from home is because the speaker is a synecdoche for home, which I already explained. It's the mother or father or someone who lives in the same house. Yes, can I understand "come over" like that? Sure, but I would not use it like that. I would say: He wants me to go over to his house. go/come is like bring/take despite the ubiquitous misuse of bring for take. "They brought me to school this morning" for "They took me to school this morning". | |
| May 30, 2023 at 17:13 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | “He wants me to come over” is a perfectly good, normal, accurate usage of come. Any native speaker will tell you this, and anyone pretending it isn’t is not a competent speaker. And it can absolutely be “I want you to come home early tonight” even if both the speaker and the addressee are not currently at home. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 16:58 | comment | added | Lambie | This is wrong: ‘I want you to come/go home early’ would not be either verb. "I want you to come home early" means the person is at home speaking to the other OR the speaker and interlocutor share the same home space in their minds such that the speaker is the "location of the home". Of course, if they are not at home, it can also be: go home as the speaker is thinking away from the place where the interlocutor is. If the speaker considers where the interlocutor is, is away from home and the speaker is away from home {physically or mentally}, it's go home. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 16:51 | comment | added | Lambie | @JanusBahsJacquet "He wants me to go over to his house. But, hey Mabel, maybe you want him to come over to ours?" [They are at home or imagine they are] Note: "He wants me to come over" is not actually an accurate use of come. By the way, CGEL does grammar not good usage. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 8:21 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | Correction: that should have said “but by the location of the speaker or the subject” (in actual fact, it can be another person in the discourse as well – ‘he wants me to come over’ – but speaker and subject are the most common). A brief, but good, description of how these verbs actually work is given in CGEL, 1550–1553. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 8:11 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | Even in general terms, this is not true. Unlike some languages, English does not distinguish come/go by the speaker’s actual location, but by the location of the subject at the moment which is notionally emphasised in the utterance. In ‘I want you to come/go home early’, either verb can be used regardless of whether the speaker is currently at school, depending on whether Johnny’s current location (at home) or his in-context location (at his friend’s house) is emphasised. It’s the context of the narrative, not the speaker’s location, that determines which to use. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 2:52 | comment | added | Showsni | The question seems more likely to be asking about a potential future trip, in which case the meanings are very similar. Imagine Mum and Johnny are both at home, Mum says "I'm going to the shops now, you should stay here and do your homework." Johnny says "I'd rather come/go with you." | |
| May 29, 2023 at 23:27 | history | edited | Lambie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| May 29, 2023 at 23:09 | history | edited | Lambie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 291 characters in body
|
| May 29, 2023 at 19:02 | history | answered | Lambie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |