Sentence question

Question

Is the sentence correct?Give the keys to John to give it to me.

Clive · Accepted Answer

No.

Give the keys to John to give to me.

Anonymous · Answer

CliveNo.Give the keys to John to give to me.

Thanks teacher.

Then would this be correct as well:

Give it to John to give to me.

Clive · Answer

Yes

Anonymous · Answer

CliveYes

Just curious, would you please tell me why the second 'it' is wrong?

Also, is there another way of saying the same thing?

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousJust curious, would you please tell me why the second 'it' is wrong? Also, is there another way of saying the same thing?

Give the keys to John so he can give them to me.

The second "it" is wrong because the infinitive clause refers to "keys."

Give the keys [to be given to me] to John.

Anonymous · Answer

AlpheccaStars AnonymousJust curious, would you please tell me why the second 'it' is wrong? Also, is there another way of saying the same thing?Give the keys to John so he can give them to me.The second "it" is wrong because the infinitive clause refers to "keys."Give the keys [to be given to me] to John.

Thanks AStars. Can 'it' be used instead of 'them' in your sentence as well?

I did not get what you meant by 'it' being wrong because the infinitive clause refers to 'keys'. What does that mean and why does it make it wrong?

Thanks again.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousThanks AStars. Can 'it' be used instead of 'them' in your sentence as well?

No. Keys is plural. "It" is singular. It is not correct to have a plural antecedent for a singular pronoun.

Give John the keys to give to me.
Give John the keys which / that he will give to me.

It is wrong to have "it" or "them" in the relative clause modifying "keys", because [which or that] is the object. The relative pronoun is not necessary. if you omit the relative pronoun, adding another pronoun for the object is wrong.
The same principle holds for the infinitive clause.

RandomGuy · Answer

AlpheccaStarsThe same principle holds for the infinitive clause.

I’d say that’s because it IS a relative clause. Infinitival relatives are more obvious in examples like I have no one in whom to confide (non-wh: I have no one to confide in) – compare finite I have no one in whom I can confide (non-wh: I have no one I can confide in).
However, wh infinitivals don’t allow preposition stranding: *I have no one who to confide in.

Anonymous · Answer

AlpheccaStars AnonymousThanks AStars. Can 'it' be used instead of 'them' in your sentence as well?No. Keys is plural. "It" is singular. It is not correct to have a plural antecedent for a singular pronoun.Give John the keys to give to me.Give John the keys which / that he will give to me.It is wrong to have "it" or "them" in the relative clause modifying "keys", because [which or that] is the object. The relative pronoun is not necessary. if you omit the relative pronoun, adding another pronoun for the object is wrong.The same principle holds for the infinitive clause.

Thank you. Then why is it possible to use 'them' in the reletive cause of this sentence that you provided, what is the difference:

Give the keys to John so he can give 'them' to me.

RandomGuy · Answer

AnonymousThen why is it possible to use 'them' in the relative cause

I don’t see a relative clause in that sentence.

Sentence question

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions