Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

My teacher said "I am going to have a walk" today in class and to me it seems incorrect. Correct variants that I know are:

  • Going for a walk
  • Going to take a walk
  • Going to walk
  • ...

Is this correct? If so, why?

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

It's fine. I agree that it sounds more British than American. Americans tend to prefer "take" in expressions such as "take a shower," while British English will also use "have." See this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv343.shtml

share|improve this answer

There is nothing wrong with this construction. It sounds more British than American, for some reason, but if you can have a fight, or have a bath, or have a go at something, why can't you have a walk?

share|improve this answer
2  
In theory yes, but in practise, I agree with glenatron that it somehow sounds a bit odd. –  Steve Melnikoff Nov 30 '10 at 23:37
    
You can, but you don't. Don't expect to find perfect logic in describing language. –  Colin Fine Dec 1 '10 at 12:12

You could say "I am going to have a walk" and although it seems a bit clunky to me it is quite understandable.

Going for a walk and going to take a walk would both work well, the first is maybe more British English the latter more US English but they are the most common ways one would use that phrase.

"Going to walk" is not a statement in itself, it needs a destination - "I'm going to walk to the shops" would be fine but if you had no destination in mind or you didn't want to say what your destination was you would just say "I'm going for a walk."

share|improve this answer
    
"Going to walk" sounds correct, as "walk" is a verb in that context, isn't it? –  Corey Dec 1 '10 at 3:38
    
@Corey: "I'm going to walk" is a bit awkward, and it definitely feels incomplete: typically walk without a destination implies giving up or walking out on something. "Are you going to accept the contract? No, I'm going to walk." –  Jon Purdy Dec 1 '10 at 8:14
    
It could be used in a context such as: "are you going to drive to the shops?"; "no, I'm going to walk" - though obviously not if you live in LA :-) –  Steve Melnikoff Dec 1 '10 at 10:04
    
@Steve Melnikoff's example is good but the destination is still being provided by the other person in the dialogue, so although the person speaking is only saying "I'm going to walk" the overall semantic construct is still "I'm going to walk to the shops." –  glenatron Dec 1 '10 at 10:59

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.