How many patterns for the verb "to go"?

[nick32]

While I was reading an essay sample I had found in the ESL website I came across the sentence "Three times a week after school I go visit my dad":shock:. I would have expected to find either "go to visit" or "go visiting". Could anybody tell me something more about the cases in which I can use this verb pattern for the verb "to go"? without "to" nor "continuous" form?Thanks for any help!

 

[ecenur]

While I was reading an essay sample I had found in the ESL website I came across the sentence "Three times a week after school I go visit my dad":shock:. I would have expected to find either "go to visit" or "go visiting". Could anybody tell me something more about the cases in which I can use this verb pattern for the verb "to go"? without "to" nor "continuous" form?Thanks for any help!

Honestly, English is a tricky language. Many think english is easy, and writing an essay is easy but, it's really not. You can't say, " I go visiting my dad" but you could say, " I go to visit my dad" You could also say, " I go visit my dad" that works with out the "to" an example would be, " I go eat pizza there all the time" I could also say, " I go to eat pizza there all the time" but, if you do not want to use the world " to" then it would definitely work.

 

[5jj]

The most tricky thing here is that in informal conversation people often produce utterances that are not 'correct' according to the grammar books.

Let's break this up:

1. For examination work, go visit is wrong.
2. You may hear go visit in conversation.
3. We can and do go dancing, go camping, go skiing, etc. If you regard visits to your father as a leisure activity, I see no reason why go visiting should be unacceptable.
4.. Go to visit is the safest form to use.

 

[Frank Antonson]

It crosses into a subject I call "usage" when the question of right or wrong appears. I tend to be more of a descriptivist and prefer not to judge the utterance -- other than to consider whether or not it makes sense, or what sense is intended.

I don't mean to denigrate the subject of usage. It is just that usage is more sociological and less precise than syntax.