So I suppose “Can he go fishing?” is asking if he has easy access to water with fish in it. If so, I think “Yes he can go fishing, and play the drums” is a possible sarcastic reply meaning “Don’t be an idiot, there is no water anywhere near here”.Let's move on to ' go fishing '.
Again, switching the word from jogging to fishing to kayaking doesn't change the grammar of the sentence. "can go" still means "can he leave". He has nothing better to do, he has access to a lake and a kayak so he can go to the lake, get in the kayak, and drown. Yes, he can go kayaking.OK, so Myridom to refer to ability should I say ' Can he fish ' ? But if I refer to kayak, shouldn't I say ' Can he go kayaking ? '. Does the latter refer to ability or not ?
Google Translate also tells me that "andare" also means "go". Not everyone can go kayaking because it is expensive or far away. That is different from being able to kayak - being able to use the oars and such.OK, but I have checked ' go kayaking ' in Wordreference's dictionary and in Italian it is translated as ' andare in kayak ' . ' Andare in kayak ' is not an ability that everyone can do. Therefore, my doubt remains....
The issue is whether or not there is a verb for the activity. "To kayak" is a verb. "To karate" is not. You don't need "do" with "kayaking" and, as we've said "go kayaking" is not a substituted for "do kayaking" - it has a very different meaning.Please take a look at this post 'do' or 'go' with certain sports and activities. Moreover, if you check a dictionary at the entry ' kayaking ' , you mostly see ' go kayaking ', not ' do kayaking '. This may be a reasong for choosing go kayaking instead of do kayaking. Therefore, if I say ' Can he go kayaking ' ? It may refer to ability. This is why my doubt remains. Please all of you in this discussion be aware of the entry ' go kayaking ' in most dictionaries and its ability-related function.
This sentence makes no sense so I can't tell if you are thinking of something correct.Therefore dictionaries have no longer values if you are against the entry of kayaking in the dictionary. Is that correct ?
As I already mentioned, the way to say "do kayaking" is just "kayak" so there's no entry for "do kayaking."Ok, but if you take a look at the entry ' kayaking ', not ' to kayak ', you will mainly see ' go kayaking '. Why is ' do kayaking ' not mentioned as the entry kayaking refers to the action od doing kayaking ?
Neither expression refers to the ability to handle a kayak. They just reference the sport/activity. If you want to say you know how to handle a kayak, say "I can kayak".London calling in natural English to refer to ability, do you say ' I do kayaking ' or ' I go kayaking ' ?
Neither expresses what you want to say. Some context is needed.I want to talk about two abilities someone has , can I answer ' Yes, he can go jogging and play the drums ' or should I say ' Yes, he can go jogging and can play drums '.
heypresto , yes , I mean that he is good at fishing but I need to replace this good at fishing with ' can ' .
There was quite a lot of posts to go through, and the context was not particularly clear: It is always a good idea to include a conversation/full sentences as context.I have already provided the context. See above.