0
Stenka25 Posted 15 years ago
Grammar
"to fall" vs. "fall"
The below sentence is in the page 71 from a book, The 48 Laws of Power.
With Soderini just a few feet below him on the scaffolding, Michelangelo started to tap lightly with the chisel, letting the bits of dust he had gathered in his hand to fall little by little.
Since "let" has a infinitive without "to" as object complement, "to fall" seems to be wrong, and should be corrected to "fall." To me, this blunder happened with long modifiers of "the bits," "of dust" and "he had gatherer in his hand."
Am I right in the argument, or "to fall" is still OK with some other reason.
If so, can you tell me why?
With Soderini just a few feet below him on the scaffolding, Michelangelo started to tap lightly with the chisel, letting the bits of dust he had gathered in his hand to fall little by little.
Since "let" has a infinitive without "to" as object complement, "to fall" seems to be wrong, and should be corrected to "fall." To me, this blunder happened with long modifiers of "the bits," "of dust" and "he had gatherer in his hand."
Am I right in the argument, or "to fall" is still OK with some other reason.
If so, can you tell me why?
Top answer
Right, it should be letting (them) fall . Perhaps this is an uncorrected revision of allowing/permitting (them) to fall .
- Right, it should be letting (them) fall .
- Perhaps this is an uncorrected revision of allowing/permitting (them) to fall .
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
1 Answers
0
Right, it should be letting (them) fall.
Perhaps this is an uncorrected revision of allowing/permitting (them) to fall.
Perhaps this is an uncorrected revision of allowing/permitting (them) to fall.
0
Related Questions