Job Discussion Forums

[dmb]

During a recent clearout I found an old photocopy of an article about how we should never split infinitives. The author gave plenty of examples. (Heavens! even Shakespeare used to do it. ) But why ? Why is it so wrong to do it?

[NumberOneSon]

[Wolf]

I once said:

"I vow to never split an infinitive again."

[guty]

I think the origin of this crime dates back a few hundred years to early attempts to base a grammar on Latin. As it is impossible to split infinitives in Latin as they are single words, it was considered bad form to do so in English, where there are no such physical restrictions.
So now it is really a case of whether you see English as a Latin based language or not.

[Bertrand]

This myth came from a time when 'linguists' really did believe that in some objective sense Latin was the 'ultimate' tongue and thus displayed the ultimate grammar which, to break, would be like breaking one of the ten Commandments. In Latin you could not split infinitives, and I really mean you COULD NOT. Why? Because the infinitives in Latin are a single lexical item. It would be like trying to say 't - bravely - o go where...' for 'to bravely go...'. Latin infinitives could not be split as they were unsplittable! (In fact, those of you who can remember having to write out those dull Latin exercises will no doubt recall not even being allowed to finish a line (i.e., the edge of the sheet of paper) with an infinitive; if you could not finish it then go down to the next line was the advice!

There were also references to Formal Logic to support the non-splitting of infinitives in English but let's not go into that.

It was just part of a PRESCRIPTIVE grammar and as such can be viewed in a similar fashion to how you interpret advice such as 'don't eat peas with a knife'.

(Just after having posted this I saw Guty's post, he has it right. They were trying to ground the grammar of English in Latin.)

This is just like that old wive's tale that you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition, which, presumably, means you "can't" say 'where do you come from?' but, rather, must opt for 'from where do you come?' (!)

[baby predator]

Wow, suddenly I have a massive craving for peas.

[Roger]

My respect for doctorus philologicus linguae Bertrand suddenly perked up a bit - he too has studied LATIN of all languages! Congratulations, mate!

[Wolf]

So have I!

Ego lupus sum.

But, that was a long time ago, for "I'm in high school anyway so I may as well take the Latin class cuz I'll have nothing better to do" reasons.

[chinagirl]

Bertrand,

That short and succinct explanation was very helpful. Thanks.

Chinagirl

[Stephen Jones]

There are in fact occasions when the infinitive must be split. The reason is that you can't split the verb and direct object. Therefore the adverb will have to go directly before the verb.
[/i]

[MindTraveller]

I too just learned the 'split infinitive' rule is getting passe now.

Then there's the "There is/There are" problem where people, including myself, say "There is...." with plural nouns. Thankfully, years ago, on the City University of New York forum, research said about 40% of spoken English broke that rule.

When I studied French, no such problem existed. "Il y a" was for both singular and plural nouns.

My question is about adjectives and adverbs. Here in Canada, I've heard people on the radio and in conversation use adjectives when they were suppose to use adverbs. Is this just a silly-stupid practice like people mis-using do/does? Or is it a new wave of linguistic change in spoken English?

[Guest]

[Bertrand]