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)
Misspelling of "too" requires ety splitEdit
I wonder, is there not a recognizably distinct use of the preposition to express how something is received? I am thinking here of prepositional phrases which function as adverbial phrases. One kind of construction, for instance, is: "to his surprise" / "to her amazement" / "to our chagrin" / "to their consternation" / etc. A closely related construction is: "to my mind" / "to my way of thinking" / "not to my taste" / "not to my liking" / etc. Another usage is to modify verbs in the passive voice: "the play was received to great acclaim" / "the death penalty was reintroduced to widespread disapproval" Grandmotherfrompeoria (talk) 15:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
I think Equinox is probably right, about it being a bad idea. It's probably not a recognizably distinct use. In languages where nouns and pronouns have more discriminating case endings than English, the expressions "sounds to me", "seems to me", etc. translate to dative, while "to my mind", "to our chagrin", "to great acclaim", etc. translate to instrumental. But dative and instrumental case endings are long gone from English. Grandmotherfrompeoria (talk) 17:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
I notice that the use of "to" as a particle in sense 3 is distinguished here from its use as an adverb in senses 1 and 2. But I wonder, is this really a difference in kind, or only a difference in degree? The intransitive verbs "lay to", "lie to", "heave to" and "come to"; the (mostly) intransitive verbs "stand to" and "fall to"; and the transitive verbs "push to", "pull to" and "bring to" (in the sense of resuscitate)... these all seem to blend, in varying degrees, the use of "to" as a particle and as an adverb. The transitive group is perhaps closer to the adverbial end of things, and the intransitive group closer to the particulate end, but they all seem to be instances of phrasal verbs and, at the same time, instances of a verb modified by an adverb. Grandmotherfrompeoria (talk) 15:08, 23 March 2018 (UTC)