Pet peeve

[Douglas G. Wilson]

>>>>... as others will undoubtedly note, split infinitives are
>>>>perfectly acceptable, another 18th c. prescriptivism surviving too
>>>>long.  In "would change", by the way, "change" is an infinitive.
>>>>Modals take unmarked infinitives.  The "to" is not what makes a
>>>>form an infinitive.  It's just one way of marking that status. ...
>>
>>>Well, that's really a question of definition. ...
>>
>>The Merriam-Webster English usage dictionary says (in an extended
>>discussion):
>>
>>"... _to_ is only an appurtenance of the infinitive, which is the
>>uninflected form of the verb. In many constructions the infinitive is used
>>alone ...
>So according to this practice, the subjunctives in "I demand that he
>leave" or "If it be treason" are really infinitives?  And when
>first-year syntax students learn than modals don't govern the
>infinitive (*He could to leave") they're being misinformed?  It's
>certainly not standard practice in linguistics courses and texts to
>take the uninflected but to-less form of a verb following a modal or
>in the "that" complement of a verb like "demand" or "require" to
>constitute an infinitive.  (Another case is "She made me (*to) do
>it".)  Base form/bare verb form (maybe even "infinitive stem") si,
>infinitive no.

The Random House dictionary gives for "infinitive":

"(in English) the simple or basic form of the verb, as come, take, eat, be,
used after auxiliary verbs, as in I didn't come, He must be, or this simple
form preceded by a function word, as to in I want to eat."

AHD4:

"A verb form that functions as a substantive while retaining certain verbal
characteristics, such as modification by adverbs, and that in English may
be preceded by to, as in To go willingly is to show strength or We want him
to work harder, or may also occur without to, as in She had them read the
letter or We may finish today."

AHD4 also gives "bare infinitive":

"In English, the infinitive without to, as used with modal auxiliary verbs.
In the sentence I must go to the store now, the verb go is a bare infinitive."

Merriam-Webster usage dictionary (p. 545):

"Since the 18th century there has been an assumption that the _to_ is part
of the infinitive, though that is not so."

Swan's "Practical English Usage" says (2nd ed., p. 277):

"We usually put the marker _to_ before the infinitive .... But we use the
infinitive without _to_ in some cases."

Examples given by Swan include:

I must go now.
Can you help me?
Did you feel the earth move?
Have Mrs. Hansen come in, please.
Why not take a holiday?
All I did was (to) give him a little push.

I like the expression 'unmarked infinitive' myself.

It seems to me that the present subjunctive just happens to look like an
'unmarked/bare infinitive' or 'bare/base/stem form'; it's really a distinct
entity, I think. I think it's this subjunctive -- not an infinitive --
which occurs in expressions like "I demand that he go", "It is necessary
that he go", etc. But I think there's an 'unmarked infinitive' in "She made
me do it." And an 'unmarked' or 'unusually marked' infinitive apparently
occurs in "Try and do it", "Be sure and do it" ... although perhaps these
originated as subjunctives -- it's hard to tell sometimes.

-- Doug Wilson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ads-l/attachments/20001031/d1813d87/attachment.htm>