RE: split infinitives I checked Fowler's Modern English Usage (2nd ed.); not surprisingly, it has a lengthy entry on the subject. I will quote only excerpts: split infinitive. The English-speaking world may be divided into (1) those who neither know nor care what a split infinitive is; (2) those who do not know, but care very much; (3) those who know and condemn; (4) those who know and approve; and (5) those who know and distinguish. 1.Those who neither know nor care are the vast majority, and are a happy folk, to be envied by most of the minority classes . . . 2. To the second class, those who do not know but do care, who would as soon be caught putting their knives in their mouths as splitting an infinitive but have only hazy notions of what constitutes that deplorable breach of etiquette, this article is chiefly addressed . . . 3.The above writers are bogy-haunted creatures who for fear of splitting an infinitive abstain from doing something quite different, i.e. dividing be from its complement by an adverb; see further under POSITIONS OF ADVERBS. Those who presumably do know what split infinitives are, and condemn them, are not so easily identified, since they include all who neither commit the sin nor flounder about in saving themselves from it — all who combine a reasonable dexterity with acceptance of conventional rules. But when the dexterity is lacking, disaster follows. . . 4. Just as those who know and condemn the s.i. include many who are not recognizable, since only the clumsier performers give positive proof of resistance to temptation, so too those who know and approve are not distinguishable with certainty. When a man splits an infinitive, he may be doing it unconsciously as a mamber of our class 1, or he may be deliberately rejecting the trammels of convention and announcing that he means to do as he will with his own infinitives. . . 5. The attitude of those who know and distinguish is something like this: We admit that separation of to from its infinitive is not in itself desirable, and we shall not gratuitously say either ‘to mortally wound’ or ‘to mortally be wounded;’ but we are not foolish enough to confuse the latter with ‘to be mortally wounded,’ which is blameless English. . . We maintain, however, that a real s.i., though not desirable in itself, is preferable to either of two things, to real ambiguity, and to patent artificiality. . . After this inconclusive discussion, in which, however, the author’s opinion has perhaps been allowed to appear with indecent plainness, readers may like to settle the following question for themselves. . .
Vary good article. Thanks. I suppose I am somewhere between 4 and 5. I firmly reject the idea that there is anything inherently wrong with splitting an infinitive but see no reason to make a point of it.
Dad is NOT better today! Sis (Honore Ervin) read him the riot act and he said, again, that he would go to Urgent Care. Has he gone? No. Am I holding my breath waiting for him to go? No.
Like Sis said, if he had pneumonia, he'd be dead by now. We're at our wits' end. Our last reserve is to tell him Mom would be disappointed in his behavior, she'd want him to take care of his health and go to Urgent Care. But if that doesn't work, and somehow I doubt it will, we're out of options.
I simply do not understand his attitude. He's usually very good about going to the doctor. He is also not usually a selfish, inconsiderate beast. Really, his behavior is almost more worrying than his mystery illness.
Update: He is, supposedly, going tomorrow. Couldn't go this afternoon because Sis had an appointment and he, very sensibly, wants her with him. Knowing this, I feel somewhat easier in my mind.
RE: split infinitives
ReplyDeleteI checked Fowler's Modern English Usage (2nd ed.); not surprisingly, it has a lengthy entry on the subject. I will quote only excerpts:
split infinitive. The English-speaking world may be divided into (1) those who neither know nor care what a split infinitive is; (2) those who do not know, but care very much; (3) those who know and condemn; (4) those who know and approve; and (5) those who know and distinguish.
1.Those who neither know nor care are the vast majority, and are a happy folk, to be envied by most of the minority classes . . .
2. To the second class, those who do not know but do care, who would as soon be caught putting their knives in their mouths as splitting an infinitive but have only hazy notions of what constitutes that deplorable breach of etiquette, this article is chiefly addressed . . .
3.The above writers are bogy-haunted creatures who for fear of splitting an infinitive abstain from doing something quite different, i.e. dividing be from its complement by an adverb; see further under POSITIONS OF ADVERBS. Those who presumably do know what split infinitives are, and condemn them, are not so easily identified, since they include all who neither commit the sin nor flounder about in saving themselves from it — all who combine a reasonable dexterity with acceptance of conventional rules. But when the dexterity is lacking, disaster follows. . .
4. Just as those who know and condemn the s.i. include many who are not recognizable, since only the clumsier performers give positive proof of resistance to temptation, so too those who know and approve are not distinguishable with certainty. When a man splits an infinitive, he may be doing it unconsciously as a mamber of our class 1, or he may be deliberately rejecting the trammels of convention and announcing that he means to do as he will with his own infinitives. . .
5. The attitude of those who know and distinguish is something like this: We admit that separation of to from its infinitive is not in itself desirable, and we shall not gratuitously say either ‘to mortally wound’ or ‘to mortally be wounded;’ but we are not foolish enough to confuse the latter with ‘to be mortally wounded,’ which is blameless English. . . We maintain, however, that a real s.i., though not desirable in itself, is preferable to either of two things, to real ambiguity, and to patent artificiality. . .
After this inconclusive discussion, in which, however, the author’s opinion has perhaps been allowed to appear with indecent plainness, readers may like to settle the following question for themselves. . .
----Alan
Class V here. There are times and places to split one's infinitives, after all.
DeleteVary good article. Thanks. I suppose I am somewhere between 4 and 5. I firmly reject the idea that there is anything inherently wrong with splitting an infinitive but see no reason to make a point of it.
DeleteManhattan DA takes EMERGENCY action against Trump [Click] Yee-ha!
ReplyDelete—Alan
Dad is NOT better today! Sis (Honore Ervin) read him the riot act and he said, again, that he would go to Urgent Care. Has he gone? No. Am I holding my breath waiting for him to go? No.
ReplyDeleteLike Sis said, if he had pneumonia, he'd be dead by now. We're at our wits' end. Our last reserve is to tell him Mom would be disappointed in his behavior, she'd want him to take care of his health and go to Urgent Care. But if that doesn't work, and somehow I doubt it will, we're out of options.
I simply do not understand his attitude. He's usually very good about going to the doctor. He is also not usually a selfish, inconsiderate beast. Really, his behavior is almost more worrying than his mystery illness.
The only words I can come up with are, "My synpathies."
DeleteThanks, Bill.
DeleteUpdate: He is, supposedly, going tomorrow. Couldn't go this afternoon because Sis had an appointment and he, very sensibly, wants her with him. Knowing this, I feel somewhat easier in my mind.
DeleteMake it early rather than late tomorrow, if you can.
Delete---Alan
🍀❤️
DeleteCalifornia passes most stringent diesel locomotive emissions rules [Click]
ReplyDelete—Alan
Alfred the Average? Court case coins may alter the view of a king. [Click] So much information from a single coin!
ReplyDeletePBS Eons: The Trouble With Trilobites [Click] I am now far better informed about trilobites.
ReplyDelete---Alan
What, no Tribbles?
DeleteI was impressed by the ones that developed spines to deter jawed fish.
Delete---Alan