I tried to explain him

[tufguy]

1) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain him.

2) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain to him.


Which one is correct "I tried to explain him" or "I tried to explain to him" or both?

 

[GoesStation]

They're both wrong for different reasons: the first because it's ungrammatical except in a very unlikely sense that doesn't work in your scenario; the second because it's ungrammatical and doesn't say what you tried to explain. You can add a single word to the second to fix the problem.

 

[Tarheel]

Two things, tufguy. One, I wanted to supply the missing word(s) for those sentences, but I'm pretty sure Goes wants you to figure it out for yourself. Two, it seems to me that your friend probably already knows what the problem is; he just wants his phone fixed. (I'm willing to be proven wrong.)

 

[Phaedrus]

1) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain him.

2) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain to him.

Interestingly, (2) could be fixed by deleting the first period, which would render the second sentence a zero relative clause within the first sentence:

(2a) There was a problem with his phone I tried to explain __ to him. =
(2b) There was a problem with his phone which I tried to explain __ to him.

Alternatively, (2) could be fixed by changing the first period to a comma. This gives a different meaning, expressed by (2d):

(2c) There was a problem with his phone, I tried to explain to him. =
(2d) I tried to explain to him [that] there was a problem with his phone.

 

[tufguy]

Interestingly, (2) could be fixed by deleting the first period, which would render the second sentence a zero relative clause within the first sentence:

(2a) There was a problem with his phone I tried to explain __ to him. =
(2b) There was a problem with his phone which I tried to explain __ to him.

Alternatively, (2) could be fixed by changing the first period to a comma. This gives a different meaning, expressed by (2d):

(2c) There was a problem with his phone, I tried to explain to him. =
(2d) I tried to explain to him [that] there was a problem with his phone.

"It" is the missing word.

 

[GoesStation]

"It" is the missing word.

Correct. Well done.

 

[Phaedrus]

"It" is the missing word.

"It" is the missing word as Tufguy punctuated (2). It would be ungrammatical to add "it" in my (2a), (2b), (2c), or (2d).

My post shows that if the period were deleted or replaced with a comma, the structure would be different and nothing would be missing at all.

 

[GoesStation]

Tufguy, what you should use is There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain it to him. Phaedrus's other suggestions are grammatical but they're more complicated. You don't need them.

Phaedrus, let's keep things simple for Tufguy and other learners at his level. Thanks!

 

[emsr2d2]

Explaining his problem to him won't help. You need to fix it.

 

[Phaedrus]

Explaining his problem to him won't help. You need to fix it.

Tufguy's speaker seems to want to identify the problem for "him." The explanation of the problem is really an identification of the problem.

For that meaning, most native speakers would say:

2e) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain to him what it was.

Once again, there is no "it" right after "explain" in my suggestion.

 

[GoesStation]

For that meaning, most native speakers would say:

2e) There was a problem with his phone. I tried to explain to him what it was.

This native speaker prefers the shorter version, I tried to explain it to him.

 

[Phaedrus]

This native speaker prefers the shorter version, I tried to explain it to him.

There is arguably a subtle difference between the two:

(i) I tried to explain the problem to him.
(ii) I tried to explain to him what the problem was.

The sense I get from (i) is a step-by-step explanation of the problem. The sense I get from (ii) is an overall identification of the nature of the problem.

 

[GoesStation]

There is arguably a subtle difference between the two:

(i) I tried to explain the problem to him.
(ii) I tried to explain to him what the problem was.

The sense I get from (i) is a step-by-step explanation of the problem. The sense I get from (ii) is an overall identification of the nature of the problem.

I agree. However, this discussion delves into a level of detail that can only confuse the OP. Please carry it on elsewhere if you'd like to continue it.

(You may have noticed that I alluded to a complicated scenario in post #2 where sentence 1 would be possible. I intentionally didn't describe it to avoid confusing the thread with too much detail.)