Go and find him!

[Omzinesý]

A very easy clause. Somehow, Finnish always expresses it "Go to seek him". How is it with the other languages?

Go and find him!
Mene etsimään hänet!

[xinda]

A very easy clause. Somehow, Finnish always expresses it "Go to seek him". How is it with the other languages?

Go and find him!

Mene etsimään hänet!

:roc: 去找他！qù zhǎo tā
:roc: 去揣伊！khì tshuē i

P-Vdangku: iōlkian zteongtieongkā!
ATTR-male find.NEC.IMP-Ns

[míkl]

I think I'm going to be rebellious and not do the copy-paste

Mësogzën:

Yaĵrapd rùttamvo! Yaĵrapd rùttarùtt zuki!
Ya-ĵrapd rù-tta-mvo! Ya-ĵrapd rù-tta-rùtt zuki!
ADV-present 2SG-PFV-go! ADV-present 2SG-PFV-find 3SM!

Tense is unmarked on verbs and usually done with adverbs, but presently has fallen out of use as a tense marker and is now instead used for the imperative.

I'm a bit sketchy on my aspect so that aspect may not be correct.

I deliberately haven't added IPA because I keep changing my mind on the phonology.

[Sankon]

In Latin this would be expressed with a purpose construction.

Ī ut eum inveniās!

Here, ut combined with a subjunctive (inveniās) is used to show the purpose of the action itself, i.e. the person will go for the purpose of finding him.

Ī tū quī eum inveniās!

Here, Latin combines a relative pronoun (quī) with a subjunctive to show the purpose of the person doing the action, i.e. the person (whom you sent) is supposed to find him.

Ī eum inventum!

Here, Latin uses the accusative supine (inventum) to show purpose. This is usually only done with verbs of motion.

Other was of expressing purpose use gerunds:

Ī ad eum inveniendō!
Ī eum inveniendī causā!

The first uses ad, a preposition meaning "to", with an accusative gerund to show purpose, and the second uses causā with a genitive gerund (for the sake of...) to show purpose.

Those can also be expressed with gerundives (future passive participle, essentially).

Ī ad eum inveniendum!
Ī eī inveniendī causā!

The gerundive, being a participle, needs to agree with eum. These formations essentially mean the same thing as using a gerund, except is (3rd person masc. pronoun) is put into the respective case, instead of inveniō.

[xijlwya]

A very easy clause. Somehow, Finnish always expresses it "Go to seek him". How is it with the other languages?

Easy suits me well.

Go and find him!

go patái dha (go) geténko kíb pían
/gɐ pɜ.ˈtai ðɜ gɐ gə.ˈtɛn.kɐ ˈkib ˈpiɜn/
IMPR go and IMPR search 1 3

[Nortaneous]

Kannow:

Tʼỳqdỳg rincʼíng!
/tʷʼqʰtʷɨk ʈ͡ʂincʼinʷk/
[tʷʼʉ̯ɨɵ̯qʷʰtʷʉ̯ɨk̚ ʈ͡ʂɨ̯iɲc͡çʼiy̯nʷk̚ʷ]
tʷʼ-qdỳ-g ri-ncʼi-nʷ-g
SJV.NONP.MID.OPT-go-2S.A SJV.NONP.COND-find-C1.P.SG-2S.A

[Hakaku]

French

Va le chercher !
go.2SG.IMP DET.M find-INF
"Go find (get) him" (said to one person)

Allez le chercher !
go.2PL-IMP DET.M find-INF
"Go find (get) him" (said to many people, or formally to one person)

Va le trouver !
go.2SG.IMP DET.M find-INF
"Go find (spot) him" (said to one person)

Allez le trouver !
go.2PL-IMP DET.M find-INF
"Go find (spot) him" (said to many people, or formally to one person)

"Chercher" implies more that you want to find and retrieve the person, while "trouver" is more akin to find, seek, or spot.

If you want to express more along the lines of "Go ahead and X him", or if the location of the person sought was formerly expressed and you wish to say "Go there and X him", you could use either "Vas-y le X" or "Allez-y le X". You could also use "Va-t'en le X" or "Allez-vous en le X" to express more along the lines of "Go off and X him", though it has the nuance of wanting to get the person commanded out of your sight.

[taylorS]

Kanussetian:

Wigo pyau gowannuusak!
w-i-go pyau go-wannuus-a-k
go-PRS-2.IMP then 2.IMP.NOM-find-3SG.ACC.
"go then find him"

[Darkgamma]

Kannow:

Tʼỳqdỳg rincʼíng!
/tʷʼqʰtʷɨk ʈ͡ʂincʼinʷk/
[tʷʼʉ̯ɨɵ̯qʷʰtʷʉ̯ɨk̚ ʈ͡ʂɨ̯iɲc͡çʼiy̯nʷk̚ʷ]
tʷʼ-qdỳ-g ri-ncʼi-nʷ-g
SJV.NONP.MID.OPT-go-2S.A SJV.NONP.COND-find-C1.P.SG-2S.A

Ho-shi-l33t

Bella Coole here I come. Totally stealing this phonological idea.

Ontopic:

Kti:
Nautante heian!
/nautante xeian/
[nautantɛ heʉɑn]
go-2IMP=follows find.person-2IMP
Go and find the person!

And let's keep this under a list people, please.

[Chagen]

Demonos: Zeteng, jun Gino kaugen!
Walk=VERB, and Him-ACC find-VERB!

[Darkgamma]

Demonos: Zeteng, jun Gino kaugen!
Walk=VERB, and Him-ACC find-VERB!

What did I say?


Kti:
Nautante heian!
/nautante xeian/
[nautantɛ heʉɑn]
go-2IMP=follows find.person-2IMP
Go and find the person!

Demonos: Zeteng, jun Gino kaugen!
Walk=VERB, and Him-ACC find-VERB!

Read the translation subforum rules.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3

Once more, let's keep this under a list people.

[Iyionaku]

German

Geh ihn suchen!
[geː ʔiːn ˈsʊxŋ̩]
go-2SG.IMP 3SG.MASC.ACC search-INF
Go and find him!

Yélian

Tem kosandas!
[təm ˌkoˈzandas]
3SG.MASC.OBL go-find-2SG.IMP

[Arioch]

Old Gothic

Gagg (du) bigitan ina!
[gɑŋk (du) biˈɣitɑn ˈinɑ]
go-2SG.IMP (to) discover.INF 3SG.MSC.ACC
Go and find him!

Standard (Modern) Gothic

Gang begten in!
[kɑŋ pəjtn̩ in]
o-2SG.IMP discover.INF 3SG.MSC.ACC
Go and find him!

Nidrosian

Gang finda han!
[kaŋ ˈfɪnta han]
o-2SG.IMP discover.INF 3SG.MSC.ACC
Go and find him!

[Tuslaven Kukristo]

Esperanto:
Truvo lin!
Find him!

Teeverb Kuluxem:

Co-ubdiscoven tuveneel!
I command you to find him!

Yaco-ubdiscoven tuveneel.
May you find him.

Pal-ubdiscoven tuveneel.
Please find him.

[clawgrip]

Japanese
彼を探しに行け！
Kare o sagashi ni ike!
/kare o sagaɕi ni ike/
3 ACC search-ADV/N DAT go-IMP

[Lao Kou]

Géarthnuns

Öçek la söböt ba zhdazh hükadiz!
2SG-NOM AUX.PRES 3SG-ACC PTCL seek go-IMP
Go and find him! (as in a round of hide-and-seek)

Öçek la söböt hühauz!
2SG-NOM AUX.PRES 3SG-ACC go.and.get-IMP
Go and find him! (said petulantly to a serviceperson about finding the manager)

[Prinsessa]

Icelandic

Farðu og sæktu hann!
Go and find him! (said to one person)

Farið og sækið hann!
Go and find him! (said to more than one person)

Two imperatives with an 'and' in between. The infinitives are fara go and sækja fetch, etymologically related to English seek, so that bears its similarities to the Finnish shown by OP!

Old Gothic

Gagg (du) bigitan ina!
[gɑŋk (du) biˈɣitɑn ˈinɑ]
go-2SG.IMP (to) discover.INF 3SG.MSC.ACC
Go and find him!

Is it confirmed Gothic would really just use an infinitive like that? It looks really weird from a North Germanic perspective, at least. How would German and Dutch do it? I'm pretty sure the 'find' in English is an imperative and not an infinitive, shortened from "go and find him".

[Lao Kou]

How would German and Dutch do it? I'm pretty sure the 'find' in English is an imperative and not an infinitive, shortened from "go and find him".

There's a German version offered in the post above the Gothic.

[Prinsessa]

How would German and Dutch do it? I'm pretty sure the 'find' in English is an imperative and not an infinitive, shortened from "go and find him".

There's a German version offered in the post above the Gothic.

Ah! Seems it would use the infinitive then. How bizarre, West Germanic. c;

I still wonder how it would be done in Gothic or Proto-Germanic, tho. If West and North disagree, East might too!

[Ephraim]

1. Go find him!
2. Go and find him!

English seemingly allows a construction similar to the German one. The infinitive and imperative are of course morphologically identical in English but it is very tempting to interpret find as an infinitive in example 1 and an imperative in example 2. That way, we could say that English has both a "West Germanic-type" construction and a "North Germanic-type" construction.

But I actually think that find is an imperative in both examples. The English "go get construction", where the verbs go and come (and reportedly sometimes other other verbs of motion, especially run) is followed by another verb is probably closer to a serial verb construction than a construction with a bare infinitive.

The truly strange thing about this construction is that it's only possible in environments that call for forms that are identical to the infinitive, meaning it's really a morphological restriction.

See:
http://individual.utoronto.ca/bjorkman/ ... LLT%5D.pdf

The inflection condition, seen already in (1), is further illustrated in (2). The bare inflection allowed in the go get construction includes imperatives (2-a); to-infinitives (2-b); modal complements (2-c); and subjunctives (2-d). It also includes non-3rd-singular present tense verbs, as in (2-e):

(2) a. Come visit us next week.
b. I want to go take a nap.
c. Birds will come play in your birdbath.
d. Her supervisor demanded that she go buy a replacement.
e. I/you/we/they go get the paper every morning.

All overtly inflected verb forms, including the present tense with third-person singular
agreement (3-a), are excluded (Zwicky, 1969):3

(3) a. *She goes gets / go gets / goes get the paper every morning.
b. *Our neighbour came left / come left / came leave a note on our door.
c. *Clare has gone bought / go bought / gone buy the newspaper already.
d. *Susan is coming having / come having / coming have lunch with us.

The contrast between (2-e) and (3-a) is particularly striking, because it illustrates that it is the surface phonological properties of the verb forms involved, rather than their formal features, that determines grammaticality. The data in (4) further confirm that the con- trast between these examples is really morphological, rather than being (for example) an incompatibility between the go get construction and specifically third-singular subjects, or between the construction and past tense semantics. In (4) Do-support is triggered by nega- tion or by Subject-Aux inversion, resulting in bare morphology on the main verbs. This ‘rescues’ the ungrammatical examples from (3-a-b), though the third-singular subjects and past tense semantics remain:4

(4) a. Does she go get the paper every morning?
b. Did our neighbour come leave a note on our door?
c. She doesn’t go get the paper every morning.
d. Our neighbour didn’t come leave a note on our door.