Let's go try it.

I know the above sentence is quite correct grammatically because I have heard it spoken on numerous occasions.

Could anyone please parse it for me?

Also, what's the problem with these versions of the same sentence (Or how are they different)?

Let's go and try it.

Let's go to try it.

  • 2
    I'm not convinced "Let's go try it" is in fact "correct". As with You should come visit me soon and I'll go see what he wants, I think strictly speaking those two verbs should be separated by and (or feasibly to or some other "linking" element). There are other English verbs that can quite naturally "concatenate" in this way (Vaccinations help prevent illness, I don’t dare fight a gorilla,...), but mostly it's not really "valid" without something in between the two highlighted verbs. Mar 30, 2021 at 15:38
  • 2
    Native speakers who don't know or care about formal syntax can easily identify "flaky" usages by considering what happens if they switch to past tense. Even the sloppiest native speaker would never say We went tried his idea, but it didn't work (though the linking and might be very "unstressed" there). But presumably whoever asked that linked earlier question got suckered into thinking it might be valid because he also thought that Let's go try his idea was "valid". Mar 30, 2021 at 15:45
  • 2
    Yes, no-one would ever say We went figured it out - it's just that with Present Tense and Infinitive verb forms it's often "idiomatically acceptable" to discard the linking term (usually, and). For your was to there's nothing really wrong with using would. The choice makes a very subtle difference in terms of focusing on a "narrative reference time" (which "flip-flops" between the earlier "ice discovery" and the later "firing squad" time-frames). But if you can't easily see that difference for yourself (and you probably can't), it's not worth bothering about. Mar 30, 2021 at 16:29
  • 2
    In your "firing squad" example, telling us what the Colonel was to do actually puts the narrative focus quite firmly in the earlier time (the time of the ice trip, back when thinking about that ice trip while facing a firing squad was well and truly in the colonel's future). The would version tends to slide the narrative focus forward towards that "future in the past" time when he was/would be facing / did face the firing squad. Mar 30, 2021 at 17:14
  • 2
    The cited context is very definitely "future in the past" from our point of view reading it, because the context is a past tense narrative within which there's a reference to something that happened more recently than "narrative time" (so within the narrative, that firing squad episode still lay in the future, even though it was long ago by the time we're actually reading it).... Mar 31, 2021 at 15:15

1 Answer 1


They're all correct, but I'd suggest never using the third one, unless there was a convention called "Try It," and you were going to Try It lol. But the second one is just over using the word "and." Stick to simple.

  • 1
    No they're not. "Let's go try it" is not grammatically correct, although it is in common use in American English.
    – Chenmunka
    Jun 4, 2021 at 10:22

You must log in to answer this question.