infinitive as subject

Miss Elenious · Post by **Miss Elenious** » Wed May 30, 2007 6:29 pm

Hi again.

I have a question which has troubled me again. When can an infitive be a subject? For example is it right to say

To smoke can be dangerous instead of
Smoking can be dangerous

Why not? Are they both correct? The first one doesn't sound right, however I'm pretty sure I've come across examples where the infinitive was the subject

And why did Hamlet wonder 'To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles...'

Couldn't he have wondered: 'Being or not being....(oh my God it sounds awful! but why?)

I wonder whether 'tis better to keep such questions to myself and suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous grammar

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Wed May 30, 2007 9:11 pm

Swan writes, in Practical English Usage:

In older English, an infinitive clause could easily be the subject of a sentence.
To practise regularly is important...
In modern English, this is unusual and in an informal style. We more often use it as a preparatory subject and put the infinitive clause later.
It is important to practise regularly...
We can also use an -ing structure at the beginning of a sentence as the subject, instead of an infinitive clause
Selling insurance is a pretty boring job
(More natural than To sell insurance...)

So in the examples you give, it's not that the first one isn't right, it just sounds unusual to modern ears as the structure, though theoretically possible, isn't widely used.

jotham · Post by **jotham** » Thu May 31, 2007 1:54 am

Thanks for that reference. I get that question all the time periodically, and I really didn't know how to explain it other than it just doesn't sound right.

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:26 pm

No, no, no. "To+infinitive" is perfectly OK in current English but it has to be either:
1) something profound or of great importance - To impeach or not to impeach. (Or indeed, "To practise regularly is important.") Perhaps the latter is a trifle old fashioned.
2) the answer to a "Why did...?" question. Why did the one-armed man cross the road?
To go to the second hand shop.

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:55 pm

To dive in headlong without reading or thinking is indeed Andrew Patterson's style.

We are talking about the infintive as the subject of the sentence. In the interchange
Why did the chicken cross the road?
To get to the other side.
there isn't a sentence for the infinitive of purpose to be subject of. If you expanded the phrase to make a full sentence the infinitive of purpose would almost certainly be an adverbial:
It crossed the road to get to the other side.

With regard to your first statement it is a question of style, not of the importance of what is said. Now a heavy, extra-formal style will tend to be used for matters of some supposed import rather than everyday trivialities, but it is the style that effects the linguistic choice not the importance of the thing itself.

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:54 pm

Notwithstanding the fact the the frame to [VERB] or not to [VERB] apes a certain extremely well known phrase from a certain famous play by a certain famous playwright. Whether or not that makes it sound profound or just hackneyed will depend on personal taste.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 5:08 am

Wasn't it also used by Mel Brooks?

Buddhaheart · Post by **Buddhaheart** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 6:19 pm

I would say if someone is thinking of smoking or trying to smoke you might say to smoke can be dangerous (to your health). If that someone is already smoking and you ask him to quit, you might say smoking can be dangerous (to your health).

The rationale for the above is that the infinitive form tends to be speculative and hypothetical and the ing-form tends to indicate thing that has happened or is happening.

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 9:22 pm

I think you're splitting hairs.

Miss Elenious · Post by **Miss Elenious** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:56 am

Buddhaheart wrote:I would say if someone is thinking of smoking or trying to smoke you might say to smoke can be dangerous (to your health). If that someone is already smoking and you ask him to quit, you might say smoking can be dangerous (to your health).

The rationale for the above is that the infinitive form tends to be speculative and hypothetical and the ing-form tends to indicate thing that has happened or is happening.

ooooookay.I have to be really concentrated to get the difference. The thing is that I teach students to sit for English language certification which is grammar oriented and the answers are given in multiple choice form. In a couple of questions resembling the issue at question, both gerund and infinitive were given as choices. They both sounded right to me but I guess I wanted the opinion of some natives

Sorry but I have to light a cigarette now after all that concentration

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 8:02 am

I would say if someone is thinking of smoking or trying to smoke you might say to smoke can be dangerous (to your health). If that someone is already smoking and you ask him to quit, you might say smoking can be dangerous (to your health).

I suspect that if you took a straw poll of native speakers, some would agree with you, some would say the opposite and some would say it makes no difference.

jotham · Post by **jotham** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 3:04 am

I got another question concerning infinitive versus gerund:

My co-workers argued about two questions these days.
Take your time reading the novel.
Take your time to read the novel.
Are they both acceptable to native speakers?

I answered thus, but having doubts about it:

I think those two seem to be okay with perhaps a small difference in meaning. If your waiting in an office and your friend is reading but a little jittery about when their turn is, and you see that your number is a long way off, you might encourage your friend to relax a little: take your time reading the novel.
If you want a friend to read a book highly recommended by you, and you give him or her your own book to borrow, you can tell him or her that there's no pressure to return the book soon: take your time to read the novel.

Now that I think about it, you still could say "take your time reading the novel." Or am I just second-guessing myself?

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:51 am

To me Take your time reading... means "don't rush, there's no hurry" (stressing the "ongoingness"), while Take your time to read... means "make the effort to read it properly" (stressing the complete action).

Lotus · Post by **Lotus** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 9:06 am

Take your time to read... It may be just an American thing, or just a Georgia, American thing, but the infinitive used this way sounds contrived and fussy. It is much simplier, more straight forward, and easier to just say Take your time... Given the context, it probably isn't even necessary to stipulate what you are to take your time doing.

jotham · Post by **jotham** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 3:00 pm

Actually, I think I debated with myself if the infinitive really works. I think it sounds more natural to say "take your time and read the novel," or "read the novel; take your time." But I finally forced myself to accept the possibility of the infinitive and then to think of a situation to justify it. That's the problem with these theoretic questions I get that's removed from any real-life context: you can think of a lot of things that might work grammatically that noone really says anyhow. But NNES don't know that.