I would go see a good comedy at the cinema

[Nonverbis]

This is Upstream Proficiency by Virginia Evans and Jenny Dooley.

Could you tell me whether there is a mystake here? Maybe "go to see a good comedy"?

 

[emsr2d2]

This is from Upstream Proficiency by Virginia Evans and Jenny Dooley.

Could you tell me whether there is a mistake here - maybe "go to see a good comedy"?

Missing out the "to" in that construction is perfectly fine in AmE. We don't omit it in BrE.

It's ironic that the only spelling mistake in your post was the word "mistake"!

 

[Holmes]

Missing out the "to" in that construction is perfectly fine in AmE.

I'd like to add that the American omission of "to" between "go" and an immediately following verb can happen only when each verb is in its base form.

While Americans can say, "Let's go see a movie," we cannot say, "I went see a movie," "I have gone see a movie," "We are going see a movie." etc.

 

[jutfrank]

A very common equivalent is the use of and instead of to.

If I needed cheering up, I'd go and see a movie.

This works in past tense too, where both verbs are inflected:

I went and saw a movie.

 

[Holmes]

A very common equivalent is the use of and instead of to.

If I needed cheering up, I'd go and see a movie.

This works in past tense too, where both verbs are inflected:

I went and saw a movie.

Yes, I almost mentioned that myself. The "go and [verb]" construction, in all tenses, has been used for many hundreds of years, even in the highest registers of English.

Jutfrank, does it sound bad to you, in informal English, to say "Let's go see a movie," "Come see a movie with me," etc.?

Do most British speakers find the construction bad, or is it just that British speakers have a habit of not omitting the "to" there even when speaking informally?

If British speakers really find it bad, I shall avoid using it when British speakers are listening to or reading what I say or write.

 

[emsr2d2]

We don't omit "to" or "and" even when speaking informally. For me, it's a specifically AmE construction.

 

[jutfrank]

The "go and [verb]" construction, in all tenses, has been used for many hundreds of years, even in the highest registers of English.

I've long been heard to rave among colleagues about this. Despite being a tremendously common construction, never have I once seen it mentioned by any of the mainstream ELT course materials. I don't know why. Is it as common in NAmE as it is in BrE, do you think?

Jutfrank, does it sound bad to you, in informal English, to say "Let's go see a movie," "Come see a movie with me," etc.?

No, it's pretty natural for me. It does sound a little American, but not too much. I'd say it's common enough in British English nowadays, from my observations.

 

[Holmes]

Despite being a tremendously common construction, never have I once seen it mentioned by any of the mainstream ELT course materials. I don't know why. Is it as common in NAmE as it is in BrE, do you think?

Oh, yes, the "go/come and [verb]" construction, in any tense, is very common in AmE. I don't think I've ever heard anyone criticize it. "Try and [verb]" is a different story.

No, it's pretty natural for me. It does sound a little American, but not too much. I'd say it's common enough in British English nowadays, from my observations.

That's great to hear. In my opinion, the comparison of combinations like "go/come see" to things like "going see"/"went see"/"gone see" is night and day.

The construction is even used in a famous poem by Emerson, a former Harvard professor who was one of the most eloquent and formal writers in American history.

"Come see the north wind's masonry."

- Ralph Waldo Emerson, "The Snow-Storm" (1841)