Page 1 of 1
Go so far as [to basic form] or [...-ing]
Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 2:29 pm
by Metamorfose
That's from another forum, given:
(1) The governor went so far as to replacing the typical elevator muzak...
(2) The governor even went so far as to tell the people of Alabama that voting "yes"...
Can you explain why in (1) we have an ing form and in (2) we have to+basic form?
José
Re: Go so far as [to basic form] or [...-ing]
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 4:26 pm
by metal56
Metamorfose wrote:That's from another forum, given:
(1) The governor went so far as to replacing the typical elevator muzak...
(2) The governor even went so far as to tell the people of Alabama that voting "yes"...
Can you explain why in (1) we have an ing form and in (2) we have to+basic form?
José
Use these forms:
1) The governor went so far as replacing the typical elevator muzak...
(2) The governor even went so far as telling the people of Alabama that voting "yes"...
Life's much sweeter.
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:10 pm
by Gabriella
Dear Jose,
The difference between these two sentences is that "replacing" is a so called gerund, verbal noun. It shares the properties of both verb and noun.
Having some experience is an asset for this job.
I hate knowing that you will be late.
[/u][/b]
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:05 pm
by Tara B
Use these forms:
1) The governor went so far as replacing the typical elevator muzak...
(2) The governor even went so far as telling the people of Alabama that voting "yes"...
Life's much sweeter.
It will not simplify your life, but I also like equally well:
1) The governor went so far as to replace. . .
2) The governor went so far as to tell. . .
The problem seems to be the writer's combination of gerund and infinitive in the original #1 ("to replacing"). There are some rare cases in which the preposition "to" can be followed by a gerund, but it only occurs when "to" is glued to a verb preceding it (to use a technical term
), and begins an adverbial prepositional phrase. For exmaple, "The lack of security in the war-torn area
led to looting, violence, and anarchy."
In the original example "as far as to replacing" the word "to" is not preceded by a verb. I know it's an unsophisticated explanation; maybe some of you hard-core linguists out there could help straighten me out. . .
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:07 am
by JuanTwoThree
But in the perhaps most common use of "to" as a preposition: "look forward to", there is no "glue" between "look" and "to".
When "to" really is the preposition "to" followed by the ing form you have to imagine one of those old-fashioned sign-posts with a hand on the end:
"take to"
"be used/accustomed to"
"object to"
"prefer x to y"
"be committed/dedicated to"
I don't think there's any mechanical reason for these being "to as prep" unless in "look forward to" since the third part of a three part phrasal verb is supposed to always be a preposition (I say supposed because "be about to" looks to me like a three parter).
When "to" is not the infinitive marker of verb plus verb to describe purpose blah blah etcetera is a bit too fuzzy for me. I know it's a gerund when you can put "it" instead. But I know I''m in the Arctic when it's freezing cold, all snow and I can see Polar bears. That doesn't explain why I'm there.