I just rolled back Jon Harald Søby's change since all the examples given are indeed in the infinitive. You can see this because the verb is not inflected and many include a primary inflected verb - secondary verbs are generally in the infinitive. — Hippietrail 16:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Where does this sense go?
To indicate approval, just nod., In order to go to France, you have to take a TGV/airplane/ferry. In Dutch this gets translated as 'om', in French as 'pour', in spanish 'para'. Polyglot 09:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
This may just be me, but aren't the preposition 'to', and 'to' used as an infinitive-marker (where it's a particle) separate words? Technically, the second one isn't even a full word (see also another particle, "'s"). My arguement would be along the same lines that although 'report' (the noun) and 'report' (the verb) are identical in many forms, they fulfill very different roles, and merely happen to look alike. Any opinions would be appreciated, especially from a trained linguist. Xyzzyva 11:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, they are different. You can’t replace the infinitive marker to with another preposition such as into or toward. It is a purely grammatical thing like -ing. - TAKASUGI Shinji 03:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Isn't 'to' usually pronunciated as /tʃu/?
- No, it’s /ə/, /ɾə/, /tə/, or /tu/; never /tʃu/. —Stephen 17:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)