×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

try

try

(OP)
I believe that after "try", the only word that correctly follows should be "to", not "and". Unless of course you want to say "try and try and try" etc. Sooner or later must be said "to".

Since "and" is a conjunction, it should join something.

To say "try and" is silly talk and incorrect. I know, it is common, but still not correct.

jimbo

Buy a dictionary, keep it nearby and USE it. Webster's New World Dictionary of American English is recommended, and Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

RE: try

How about "it", "with" (or "without"), "again" or "harder"?

"Try it now."

"Try without complaining so much."

"Try again, you really didn't make a good effort the first time."

"Try harder, you can do it."

RE: try

It's informal, at any rate.  I have it in the same category as "can't help but...", "bring that with" (instead of "bring that with you"), "fixin' to", "ain't", etc.  I wouldn't use it in a formal situation, but conversationally, it's pretty well established.  I've caught myself using it lately.

Hg

RE: try

It's inferred, but not said.

"Try (to do) it now."

"Try (to do it) without complaining so much."

"Try (to do it) again, you really didn't make a good effort the first time."

"Try (to do it) harder, you can."
 
Arguing against consensus is like trying to fart louder than thunder.

RE: try

No missing "do it".  "Try" doesn't always need an infinitive argument.  It can be plain old intransitive, as in the last three examples above, or transitive, as in the first example, or in "try the soup", "try the lock", etc.

"Try and" isn't really *missing* something.  For some reason "and" is in the place we expect "to".  "Try and fix it" doesn't mean "try to do it" in conjunction with "fix it".  It really means "try to fix it", with some slightly different connotation that I can't quite put my finger on.

A web search reminds me of another similar construction:  "Be sure and take the grocery list with you."

Apparently "try and" has been around for as long as "try to".  Go figure.

Oh, wow.  More web search brings up Thread1010-91349!  Y'all have short memories.

What's kinda funny is how many writing and grammar sites out there include the "try and" construction when they're discussing some other matter of correctness.

Hg

RE: try

Also many nouns and verbs work as well.

"Try one of these strawberries, they're delicious."

"Try shaking it, that fixed it last time."

RE: try

Try and fix it.
Two commands maybe? first try then actually do it?

RE: try

Quote:

Also many nouns and verbs work as well.

I re-read my last post and was abhorred by that sentence construction.

This group is getting too soft!  Someone should have torn into me for that one.

RE: try

At least try AND fix it.

RE: try

Soft, eh?  Okay, MintJulep, you asked for it!  That sentence construction was abhorred by you, not the other way around.  Perhaps you were appalled?  Good lord, man, I certainly am!!  Put me right off my breakfast, it did.

Hg

RE: try

I'm sorry MintJulep, I was still trying to work out my respese to "try and fix it", so I wasn't focused on your sentence construction, if you can call it that.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: try

To quote Master Yoda from one of the recent "Star Wars" movies, in response to "I will try":  "There is no TRY, only DO!"

RE: try

Yup.  But that one's different from, say, "try and see through that grubby window".

Hg

RE: try

Try and see is not correct. In this case a command is issued "try" and a seperate command "see". One either sees or does not see. Although widely used, it is a nonsense to try and see. Try to see is more correct.

RE: try

Drat. Delete seperate and insert separate.

RE: try

Among the other definitions listed for "try" : To make an effort to do or accomplish (something); attempt .

Among the definitions for "see" : To find out; ascertain .

To substitute those meanings in the example I gave: Attempt (to do it), and find out (if you succeed or fail).

As opposed to:  Attempt (to do it), to find out (if you succeed or fail).

It's certainly a subtle distinction, but I think a clear one. In the latter sentence the emphasis is clearly on recognizing the results of the attempt , (as in a controlled experiment). The former sentence is a directive to attempt to achieve the desired results, and once the attempt has been made, to then note the results.

RE: try

Some of the grammar above needs fixed.  (As they say in the midwest)

RE: try

"Try" commands that an effort or attempt be made.  There's no guarantee of success.  If it means trying a key in a lock and it's the wrong key, you won't be able to do it.

"Do it" means do it.  It is the imperative; it is also a command.

"Try and do it," if understood literally, ends up being two commands, one of which cannot guarantee the outcome of the other, whereas the other commands it, regardless of any other factors.

"Try and do it" (or other "try and" combinations) is nothing more than another mis-construction of a sentence or phrase created by the ignorant who intend to mean "try to do it."

Things that don't follow standard English grammar are propagated like flies by the ignorant.  They become popular with the ignorant, and then the ignorant try to "educate" the rest of us, arguing that since everyone does it or says it, then it must be so.  Like rnd2 says: "Arguing against consensus is like trying to fart louder than thunder."  Nevertheless, that won't keep me from applying correct English grammar when I produce something written.

English isn't the easiest language out there, partly because of its propensity to collect stuff from every other language out there.  But the basic standards of usage are easily available in any bookstore or library, and have been established for a long time.  Ignorance is no excuse for laziness.

RE: try

(I just realized that I'm not done with my rant yet.)

I don't have the kind of issues with spoken language that I have with written language.  Spoken language is often "off the cuff" and I don't expect perfect grammar to be applied during speech.  Mine often isn't.  A speech given from a written text, however, should be prepared with a closer eye to proper grammar.  On the other hand, during the delivery of the speech, it is not uncommon for the speaker to vary the text, if it seems appropriate to do so, given the conditions and the audience.  TV personalities who constantly are reading from a prepared script should present better grammar in the body of their texts, but this is dictated by those who write the scripts.  I don't believe that news anchors write their own scripts, and they often don't have the opportunity to review the material before it's time to go on the air.

(In my area, there is a local radio show host who reads - I think he reads it - the news on the half-hour, and he garbles it so badly every day that I have come to turn up the volume so that while I drive to work, I can clearly hear him mangle it thoroughly.  He's particularly good at speaking several sentences that are unintelligible in context to the story, then stopping and starting the paragraph again, reading something entirely different, that is, what was evidently in front of him the whole time.  During this babbling, I forget, and I think he does, what he is trying to tell the radio world.  As a result of listening to him, I often don't know what the real news is, but my somewhat perverse nature derives much pleasure from his unique presentation, so I've never called or written to the radio station to complain.)  (I know he is able to read, since following the news, he identifies several upcoming pieces of music without missing a syllable.)

A point about the OED: Those who are interested in language and its variety should not rely on the Oxford English Dictionary as a usage standard.  The intention of its existence is to record the broadest variety of English words and documentation of their earliest written or printed use.  It does not pretend to be a manual of grammar.  It is a valuable resource for what it is, and I use it frequently.  But I don't use it as to determine standards of English usage, since that is not its purpose.

RE: try

And speaking of earliest written or printed use, "try and" is at least as old as "try to".  A lot of "ungrammatical" language was declared ungrammatical centuries after it had been established, by people making arbitrary decisions when writing the grammar books.

Yes, "try and" is nonstandard, in the most formal sense.  No, it isn't a marker of complete moronhood.  Yes, I'd correct it if I found it in a piece of writing I was proofreading.  And no, I wouldn't typically expect to find it in formal writing, but yet I've caught it in the New York Times.  It's a very persistent form.

Hg

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources