Can 'or' be used in this way?

[99bottles]

For example...

We used to go to that place to fish or jog.

Does this make it clear that, sometimes, we went there to fish and other times, we went there to jog? Or does it sound confusing?

 

[5jj]

It's OK. There would be more natural than to that place.

 

[Tdol]

It's not confusing- if you did both you'd use and, but we don't worry so much about tiny details- if I am jogging, I am not fishing.

 

[Phaedrus]

For example...

We used to go to that place to fish or jog.

Does this make it clear that, sometimes, we went there to fish and other times, we went there to jog? Or does it sound confusing?

The use of "or" in such a sentence is naturally interpreted as inclusive, not exclusive. In other cases, either interpretation can be natural, depending on the context.

Did you used to go there to fish or jog?

In some contexts, it would be appropriate to answer "Yes" or "No." In such contexts, "fish" or "jog" would not naturally receive special stress in the question.

In other contexts, it would be clear that you were to answer "To fish" or "To jog." In such contexts, "fish" and "jog" would naturally receive special stress in the question.

 

[Rollercoaster1]

Not a teacher

I think it was better if 99bottles had used 'and' instead or 'or'.

 

[emsr2d2]

Not a teacher

I think it [STRIKE]was[/STRIKE] would be/would have been better if 99bottles had used 'and' instead [STRIKE]or[/STRIKE] of 'or'.

emsr2d2

 

[99bottles]

The use of "or" in such a sentence is naturally interpreted as inclusive, not exclusive. In other cases, either interpretation can be natural, depending on the context.

Did you used to go there to fish or jog?

In some contexts, it would be appropriate to answer "Yes" or "No." In such contexts, "fish" or "jog" would not naturally receive special stress in the question.

In other contexts, it would be clear that you were to answer "To fish" or "To jog." In such contexts, "fish" and "jog" would naturally receive special stress in the question.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying.

 

[Phaedrus]

I'm not sure I get what you're saying.

In trying to fathom how you could find the sentence you asked about confusing, I decided that you might not know the difference between inclusive and exclusive "or."

Am I right in thinking that you thought that the sentence We used to go there to fish or jog might mean that you don't know which activity you used to go there to do?

 

[99bottles]

Am I right in thinking that you thought that the sentence We used to go there to fish or jog might mean that you don't know which activity you used to go there to do?

Yes.

 

[Phaedrus]

Yes.

I think that the sentence We went there once to fish or jog would indeed indicate that the speaker doesn't remember what they went there to do.

If he does remember, then his manner of speaking would suggest that he wants to make a riddle out of it, or just make things unclear, for the hearer.

However, We went there once to fish or jog is only about one outing. We used to go there to fish or jog, on the other hand, is about repeated outings.

The natural interpretation in the used to case is not that the speaker has amnesia or that he is trying to make a puzzle for the reader to solve.

The natural interpretation is instead: We used to go there to fish, and we used to go there to jog, but we generally did not go there both to fish and to jog in the same outing.

 

[Tdol]

If you went to fish or jog, you presumably did two activities, but not at the same time. You, therefore, did not go to only perform one activity or to exclusively perform both.

 

[99bottles]

If you went to fish or jog, you presumably did two activities, but not at the same time. You, therefore, did not go to only perform one activity or to exclusively perform both.

So do you disagree with what we concluded? If I say We used to go there to fish or jog, does it mean that every time we went there, we did both things, one after the other?

 

[emsr2d2]

So do you disagree with [STRIKE]that[/STRIKE] what we concluded? If I say We used to go there to fish or jog, does it mean that every time we went there, we did both things, one after the other?

No, not at all. It means that each time you went there, you fished or you jogged; it's possible you did both.

 

[Tarheel]

Maybe you jogged to the fishing spot. Then you fished. (In that case, of course, you fished and jogged. . )

Of course, if you did one thing or the other thing you didn't do both.

 

[Tdol]

So do you disagree with what we concluded? If I say We used to go there to fish or jog, does it mean that every time we went there, we did both things, one after the other?

No- I went there on Monday and fished. I went there on Thursday and jogged. I went there to fish or jog.

I went there on Monday and fished then jogged- I did both, one after the other. I went there on Monday and fished and jogged- did one after the other, but the sequence is not as crystal clear as in the first example.