1. "He has gone to play."

  2. "He has gone for playing cricket."

The first sentence is correct. Please explain if the 2nd one is right? If so, then why? If not, then why not?

  • 2
    Why isn’t the first sentence “He has gone to play cricket”? @VarunNair - I agree the OP should explain a little more about his hunches, but I don’t know if your second question is a fair question. What kind of “research” would you do to confirm whether a sentence like that is right or wrong? I wouldn’t know where to begin. Prepositions are flexible and tricky.
    – J.R.
    Oct 24, 2017 at 9:43
  • 1
    These sound right to me: (1) He has gone to the store for some ice cream; (2) He has gone to Florida for the weekend; (3) He has gone to prison for counterfeiting. But where we mean that he has gone in order to do something, we say that he has gone TO DO something. Maybe it is an idiom.
    – Chaim
    Oct 24, 2017 at 12:14
  • If the second phrase is intended as "he was fired for playing cricket", then I believe it could be almost correct... but you'd say "he is gone for..." because it's a state, not an action.
    – Floris
    Oct 24, 2017 at 14:28

2 Answers 2


This isn't a question of grammar, but of lexicon: which words and phrases happen to be used and which don't. There is no "why", no rule: you just have to learn that "go to [verb]" is an expression in English and "go for [verb]ing" isn't (or isn't with that meaning).

  • Actually, there is a rule in the sense that to go to and to go for have different meanings. If you go for something, there cannot be a verb. I love scones but I don't much go cake.
    – Lambie
    Oct 24, 2017 at 12:58

By convention:

  • you go to play something (e.g. a sport, an instrument)
  • you go for a session (of something you participate in, e.g. a drinking session)
  • you go to a session (of something you don't participate in, eg a cinema session)

The second sentence is "incorrect", but would be easily understood by a native speaker. It should be:

He has gone to play cricket

  • 2
    An example of 'for' in the context of cricket might be "He has gone for a game of cricket". Oct 24, 2017 at 13:22
  • @Sean I disagree. "He has gone for a sauna" yes, but "He has gone to play a game of cricket"
    – Bohemian
    Oct 24, 2017 at 13:25
  • 1
    "Gone to play a game of" may be more common, and sound more natural, but I still don't think "gone for a game of" is incorrect. And in fact "gone for a sauna" does not sound correct, to my ear... Oct 24, 2017 at 14:59
  • 1
    "Gone for a game of..." is perfectly sound to my BrE ear.
    – TripeHound
    Oct 24, 2017 at 15:09
  • 1
    This may be an AmE vs. BrE distinction; to my AmE ear "He has gone for a game of..." sounds a little odd, Now that I think about it, "gone for" sounds more correct if he's actually playing; if he's just watching, I would prefer "gone to".
    – stangdon
    Oct 24, 2017 at 16:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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