0
Stenka25 Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Doesn't this sentence need the complementizer 'for'?
In the below sentences, it seems that 'the child to advance' needs the complementizer 'for' before 'the child' to make a proper sentence because here 'the child' is subject in meaning of 'to advance.' Am I right? [And does "subject in meaning of 'to advance'" make sense? If not, how can I express the meaning properly?]
Word recognition, or decoding, deteriorates into empty rote learning when it does not lead to the reading of meaningful content. The longer it takes the child to advance from decoding to meaningful reading, the more likely it becomes that his pleasure in books will evaporate.
Word recognition, or decoding, deteriorates into empty rote learning when it does not lead to the reading of meaningful content. The longer it takes the child to advance from decoding to meaningful reading, the more likely it becomes that his pleasure in books will evaporate.
Top answer
No. 'For' is optional there and the meaning is clear.
- No.
- 'For' is optional there and the meaning is clear.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
0
Hi Stenka25
You make an excellent point. When a to-infinitival clause contains a subject, as your example does, it also contains the clause subordinator for which appears at the beginning of the clause, right before the subject. It does the same for infinitival clauses with subjects what the subordinator that does for declarative content clauses. So we get: 'T
You make an excellent point. When a to-infinitival clause contains a subject, as your example does, it also contains the clause subordinator for which appears at the beginning of the clause, right before the subject. It does the same for infinitival clauses with subjects what the subordinator that does for declarative content clauses. So we get: 'T
00
Related Questions