I saw the sentence like this on the internet.

I went to the kitchen, cooked for me.

Can I understand the meaning of this sentence like this?

I went to the kitchen and I cooked for me.

Have I made a correct paraphrase?

  • Do you have the source of this sentence? It sounds a little awkward and if anything, we probably would have said, "I went to the cooked and cooked for myself" or "I went to the kitchen where a meal had been cooked (prepared) for me" depending on what the speaker had intended originally. Apr 12, 2017 at 10:05
  • It could alternatively mean that I cooked on my say so, for my enjoyment. This would only be inferred from previous context. E.g. "As a commis chef, I always have to cook on other people's say so, but today I went into the kitchen and cooked for me." (meaning that I cooked what I wanted because I wanted to, rather than what other people told me because they told me to. The food may not necessarily be for me to eat). This would be an unusual meaning, however, so is not likely.
    – SteveES
    Apr 12, 2017 at 16:38

3 Answers 3


The quote looks like a form of colloquial speech, where the subject of the sentence (the first-person pronoun) is dropped.

Sentences in English are generally considered to require overt subjects. In a standard description of English, (1a) below would be considered grammatical, while (1b) would be considered ungrammatical:

(1) (a) I walked the dog yesterday.
(b) Walked the dog yesterday.

But in fact this is not true. (1b), and sentences like it lacking subject pronouns, are in fact common in colloquial spoken English.

- Andrew Weir, Subject pronoun drop in informal English

With this in mind, a more traditionally correct version of your quote would be:

  • I went to the kitchen; I cooked for me.

This agrees with your interpretation.


cooked for dinner.

Clearly this is not very good English.
What the writer did was make the reader "understand" too much.
The first "understanding" is that "I" cooked, even though the "I" is in the first phrase. So we have:

I cooked for dinner.

Now "understand" "for dinner" is what was done to have dinner, not what was eaten.

I went to the kitchen, (and) for dinner, I cooked.


I went to the kitchen, and in order to have dinner, I cooked.

I would not advise writing English in such "shorthand"(understandings).

  • I edited the sentence like 'I went to the kitchen, cooked for me.' What I want to know is that comma can substitute 'comma' for 'And'.
    – 박용현
    Feb 23, 2017 at 23:48
  • 1
    You can't substitute the comma for and. Even with and the sentence is clumsy. What you seem to be saying is that ..and I cooked (a meal) for myself. Feb 24, 2017 at 0:11

You got it right, however, it is grammatically incorrect. On the other hand, such usage of "me" in place of "myself" is informal and I sometimes see in English:

  • I cooked me a dinner.
  • I found me a pen to write with.

Unless you wish to sound ungrammatical it is better to say:

  • I went to the kitchen and cooked for myself.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .