Where have you traveled to?

[karina1]

Hi,

Which one is correct?

1. "Where have you traveld to?" or "where have you traveled?"

2. "I know where he has traveled." ? or "I know where he has traveled to."

It's so confusing, because at first I thought it is absolutely "Where have you traveled?". But, a friend of mine from California told me I was wrong. I suppose in "what countries have you traveled to?" we should use "to" the preposition, but not in "where have you traveled to."

So, please tell me which ones are correct, and reasons.

Thanks in advance.

 

[apbl]

The verb "to travel" does not necessarily need the preposition "to".

1) I have travelled a lot.
2) I travelled when I was young.

The preposition "to", however, reinforces the idea of going from one place to another. So I would say both examples are correct though the form with "to" is perhaps more usual.

You can also travel "in" a country or "around" a country.

In your final example a proposition is necessary but it does not have to be "to":

What countries have you travelled to? ~ simply means which countries have you visited.

What countries have you travelled around? ~ means which countries have you not only "visited" but also "explored".

But even here I don't think the difference is critical.

P.S. In British English the final "l" is doubled in the past.

 

[BobK]

They're both OK, and for some people they have distinctive meanings. I have travelled fairly widely in Europe, and a question about that would ask 'Where have you travelled?' I have not travelled to America, Africa, Asia, Australasia, or Antarctica (any continent starting with an A ;-)), and a question about that would ask 'Where have you travelled to?'

I say 'for some people' because not everyone bothers to distinguish between an area of travel and a destination. Conversely, a very few people insist on - and persist in - using the outdated word 'Whither' [meaning 'where to' - note the H'].

b

 

[karina1]

Thanks for your replies.

It just struck me that we always say "where are you at?" as well.

In this case, the preposition "at" isn't really necessay, but it just help clarify what you mean. Am I right?

p.s : "Where are you from" and "Where are you" are totally different, and adverb "where" + no preposition rule doesn't really work all the time, I guess.

 

[BobK]

'Where are you at?' is informal - but useful, because it distinguishes between a geographical position ('Where are you?') and and a mental or psychological position: 'I like where you're at'. This sort of useful but informal distinction often leads to a newly acceptable usage.

(In some dialects of Am. Eng I believe this distinction isn't made; 'Where are you at?' is just an equivalent of 'Where are you?')

b