Is there any real difference between the terms “take someone on a vacation” and “take someone for a vacation”? My sense is that there is a semantic difference but I can’t quite express what it is.
Context matters here but given nothing else to go on the former sounds like you are doing it more for your benefit (as a companion) whereas the latter is more for theirs (as a treat for them)
Thanks Novelty_Bobble. I like your differentiation.I have only seen both phrases treated as interchangeable but I wasn’t quite satisfied with that.
That’s nothing compared to the semantic difference between “taking someone for a ride” (to the Dairy Queen, for instance) and “taking someone for a ride”, underworld-style.
Taking someone ‘on a vacation’ has a slight meaning of a vacation that would have otherwise been taken without them, such as bringing a friend along to a family vacation. ‘For a vacation’ has a slight implication that the vacation is specifically for them, and maybe that they need a vacation.
I don’t think it would be a clear difference out of context.
“Take someone for a vacation” sounds weird to me. I’ve never heard it said this way. It almost sounds like you’re going to kidnap someone for your own amusement, i.e. for your vacation. Add the comma “Take someone, for a vacation.”
Same here - maybe "“Take someone for a vacation” " is used in a specific country/region?
I don’t believe most anyone would notice any discernable difference between the two statements. It might sound a bit odd to hear “for a vacation” instead of “on a vacation” but I doubt it would ping my radar much if at all.
English prepositions often get interchanged. Think of “in line” vs. “on line” which is just a local variant.
A normal sentence might read, “My family is going for a vacation in the Bahamas” or “My family is going on a vacation in the Bahamas” without any distinction. Taking someone on or for a vacation is a bit odder: both usages get fewer than 100 hits on Google. But without a context to put them in to establish why the meaning should change from one to the other, I wouldn’t claim a difference between them.
Same here
It reminds me of an expression that William Shatner uses during the introduction to his documentary “the UnXplained” where he introduces the mysteries in the episode then he says “let’s try AND find out” when I think he means “let’s try TO find out”.
In this case, I think the statement “take someone FOR a vacation” sounds odd and “take someone ON a vacation” makes more sense. At least IMHO of course.
Thanks TriPolar. I think you nailed the differentiation perfectly.
There’s a regional difference in this one. “Try and” is much more common in British English than it is in American English.
Not sure I see much difference.
But it might be regional. For example, in British English, you ‘visit’ a friend. You don’t ‘visit with’ them.
Do you mean “on line” like using the internet? If so, I would say that’s more than a simple preposition switch. “In line”, IMO, is just wrong. In no way does it communicate use of the internet. To me, anyway.
Me too.
“On line” is used in some areas (particularly in the New York City area) instead of “in line,” for the concept of “waiting in line.”
Oh. OK. I can see that.
It might be a regional thing , but Americans also use “visit” - if I visit a friend, it means I am traveling somewhere ( maybe next door) to see that friend. " Visit with" is slightly different - it more or less means to have a social conversation. So I might “visit with” a coworker before a meeting or a friend and I might be “visiting with” each other on my front porch.
Yes, that’s what I meant. Note that it’s spelled “on line” instead of “online.”
To me it sounds like the difference is who is paying for the vacation.