Talk:only to

RFD discussion: September 2019–December 2020

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

only to

"Conjunction" with non-gloss definition.

I think this should be a redirect to a sense of only (using {{senseid}}). DCDuring (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment. The relevant sense at only appears to be:

Used to express surprise or consternation at an action.

She's only gone and run off with the milkman!

They rallied from a three-goal deficit only to lose in the final two minutes of play.

Are we quite sure that it is the same sense -- even PoS -- of "only" in both these usage examples? Mihia (talk) 22:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Three observations. (1) It seems to me that the sense is not so much to express surprise or consternation, as to mark a definitive reversal of fortune. (2) The collocation is always followed by an infinitive, which is not particularly an action, but rather a state change by which all hopes are dashed. (3) There is an action involved, which is in vain, but it is the action of the main clause of which the “only to” clause is a dependent clause. (“He rushed to the hospital, only to learn that his mother had already died.”)  --Lambiam 11:06, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

And, of course it is only too easy to confuse it with "only too". SemperBlotto (talk) 11:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Not to mention only two.

Oxford has only to as part of a phrase, and only too -. I'm undecided on this at the moment. DonnanZ (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Looking at a definition of only in the likes of Century provides a multitude of semicolon-separated items that take the form "(in, for, by) but one (purpose, means, result); (in, at, for, with) no other (manner, respect, place, direction, circumstances, condition, time, way, purpose, result) than". So Lambian's example (above) might be defined as "with no other result than". One could also say "I stood only to ask a question" where it would mean "for but one purpose". The insertion of only in the verb-infinitive structure emphasizes the singular result of the infinitive with respect to the verb.

I do think this is a question of how to properly define only and that only to should be deleted (or redirected). -Mike (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

One more observation: (4) only to announcing a reversal of fortune is preceded by a pause in speaking, often reflected in the punctuation when written, like a comma here and an em dash here. That is particular to this sense; one would not write, *“we don’t want to punish; we want, only to help”, or, *“I stood—only to ask a question”.  --Lambiam 22:41, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

• I have created a new sense at only:

(with 'to' infinitive) Introduces a disappointing or surprising outcome. See also only to.

They rallied from a three-goal deficit only to lose in the final two minutes of play.

If only to is deleted, this "see also" link should be deleted, and additional content presently at only to can be moved to only as seen fit. Mihia (talk) 18:19, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

• Given the above, delete "only to". Mihia (talk) 18:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

You can use it without to also, e.g. "I helped him out only for him to betray me". 76.100.241.89

Good point. I added that as an example. Mihia (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Redirected to the newly-added, abode-discussed sense at only. - -sche (discuss) 07:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

only for

This should also be redirected to the relevant sense of only. - -sche (discuss) 07:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Also redirected for consistency and per the section above. - -sche (discuss) 23:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)