Talk:go out with

go out with
I think this should be merged into go out. (Note that our current defs don't cover something like How long have they been going out?.) —Ruakh TALK 14:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I would disagree. While go out could be improved, and we maybe should include go out together, I think that go out with, while not always a phrasal verb, has a simple idiomatic meaning which cannot be adequately covered at go out. Compare 1) I'm going out with John. and 2) I'm going out with John tomorrow. We might well consider that with is simply a linking preposition. But a phrasal verb with 2 particles is not separable, so now consider 3) I'm going out tomorrow with John.. So the sense with no romantic attachment implied can separate the with, but the first example implies romantic attachment as an idiomatic sense and hence as a phrasal verb. -- A LGRIF  talk 16:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Algrif. Two folks can be "going out with" each other without necessarily "going out" at all. Though in many cases ontogeny recapitulates etymology, with people actually having dates in public before becoming intimate, a "being intimate on a recurring basis" sense seems separable from the path to the state. DCDuring TALK 16:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Considering the difference between the romantic sense (stative?) and the one-time or even repetitive sense. I think it is possible to say "I went out for three years with Alice, but only two with Beth." in the romantic sense. This separates the purportedly inseparable. DCDuring TALK * Holiday Greetings! 23:01, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Re: 'Two folks can be "going out with" each other without necessarily "going out" at all.': No, I don't think so. I think "they're going out", in the relevant sense, is exactly synonymous with "they're going out with each other." Neither one absolutely requires "out"-ness. (Do you also see a difference between "they're dating" and "they're dating each other"?) —Ruakh TALK 17:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is seeming like a matter of attestation of the relevant sense of go out - and not the easiest kind. Keep without prejudice, pending new definitions at go out and possibly their attestation. DCDuring TALK 18:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Unsure, it could be a redirect or an entry. As pointed out, go out can take other prepositions than "with". Mglovesfun (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge per Ruakh. < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 20:30, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What about the sense in "His clothes 'went out with disco."?
 * We also have go with. It is not hard to find idiom/phrasal verb dictionaries that include all of these and other related multi-word terms such as go together. We seem to include many terms that no other references include with similarly marginal qualification under CFI.

Redirected. &#x200b;—msh210℠ 19:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * definition added for go out --Rising Sun talk? contributions 17:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)