To use 'and' (og) between two verbs like this, is common i Swedish (and apparently in Danish), but is this construction really used in English? Shouldn't the English translatioin be 'go out TO play' ??
I think there's a difference between 'to go out to play' and 'to go out and play'. If you say they go out TO play, you say that they went outside just to play, and that their plan was to play all along. On the other hand, if you say they go out AND play you say they go out, and then they decide to play now that they're outside already. In the first sentence, them going out is dependant on their plan to play, while in the second sentence these two actions are independent from eachother.
Thanks for your comment. It sounds possible, but very theoretical. It's just that I have never noticed this in English, to combine two verbs with 'and', in the way that we do in Swedish ALL THE TIME, without ever thinking that there are any difference in meaning, and we don't use the infintivie, while in English it is an 'infinitive' either way (no visible conjugation). -- Is there any native English speakers who can comment?
I think it is less common in english to do so, and more common to combine them with 'to' instead, however, there still is a difference. It's not much of a difference since the actions still are the same, but the difference does exist and if you decided to be very critical then you would make a difference between those two. Or maybe I'm just prejudiced because we make quite of a difference there in german.