Discussion:
"aimed at" vs "aimed to"
(too old to reply)
Michael
2006-05-05 07:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,

"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."

and

"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."

They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.

Thanks.

Michael
athel...@yahoo
2006-05-05 08:40:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Hi,
I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."
and
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."
They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.
In your example they do indeed appear equivalent, and both sound
equally natural, but in other examples one might sound odd; for
example, I doubt if many people would say "We aim at pleasing". Maybe
that is just because "We aim to please" is a standard phrase.

You are using "find" in the sense of "determine", but with a minor
change you could use it in its primary sense, as,

"In this experiment we aim to find parents responsible for..."

"In this experiment we aim at finding parents responsible for..."

Now I feel that there is a slight difference in emphasis, but I can't
quite identify it. Maybe in the first case there is an implication that
such parents exist, whereas in the second there is less of such an
implication.
--
athel
http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/homepage.htm
CyberCypher
2006-05-05 08:44:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Hi,
I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."
and
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."
They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.
There is no difference in meaning, only in style. Both styles are less
than optimal, IMHO. I usually change "aimed {at/to}" to "wanted to".
What's the point of using a target-shooting metaphor in a (social)
science paper? Structured abstracts usually ask for this kind of
statement in the BACKGROUND or OBJECTIVES section. In the latter, I'd
reduce it to "To find the number of responsible parents."
--
Franke: EFL teacher and medical editor
Posting from Taiwan. Unmunged email: /at/hush.ai
It's all in the way you say it, innit?
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
2006-05-05 08:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Hi,
I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."
and
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."
They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.
Thanks.
He aimed at the target.

* He aimed to the target.

He aimed to target. (Similar looking but out of place in meaning)

He aimed at hitting the target.

He aimed to hit the target.

Interesting.

--
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Stephen Calder
2006-05-05 10:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Hi,
I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."
and
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."
They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.
Thanks.
Michael
They mean the same and are both grammatical, but the first sounds more
natural to me.

I normally use "aim at" in the passive:

This experiment is aimed at finding....
--
Stephen
Lennox Head, Australia
TakenEvent
2006-05-05 16:05:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael
Hi,
I was wondering what the difference is between "aimed at <gerund>" and
"aimed to <transitive>". For example,
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."
and
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible
parents."
They seem to convey the same meaning and are grammatical.
Thanks.
"Aim at" refers to a goal or target. "Aim to" refers to one's intent.
There is a subtle difference in emphasis there, though no real quantifiable
difference in the meaning of the sentence.

In your example quoted below, finding the number of responsible parents is
being labeled as one's intent.
"In this experiment, we aim to find the number of responsible parents."


In your example quoted below, finding the number of responsible parents is
the goal.
"In this experiment, we aim at finding the number of responsible parents."


aim to: I intend to hit the target with the arrow.


aim at: The target is the bale of hay.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...