To-infinitive vs relative pronoun

Question

1. This is the book for me to like.2. This is the book I will like.3. This is the book I like.I'd like to know whether I can rephrase #1 either into #2 or #3.Thank you in advance for your help.

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

park sang joon1. This is the book for me to like.

That is unnatural.

If I am recommending a book from a long list of books to someone, then I might say the following because I know what kind of books they like to read.

This is the book (out of all the possibilities) for you to read.

It doesn't make sense that I recommend to myself to like something out of a list of possibilities.

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you, AlpheccaStars, for your very valuable answer.

Then can I rephrase #3 using to-infinitive?

CalifJim · Answer

park sang joonI'd like to know whether I can rephrase #1 either into #2 or #3.

You have to start with a better sentence. You can't do these transformations *****-nilly on any construction you please. In this case, the verb 'like', possibly because it's a stative verb, doesn't even work in the first sentence. There's no point in transforming a defective sentence into other sentences.

Note that you frequently have to add information to take the transformation in that direction, so you have to get creative about what you think the speaker means:

This is the book to buy. ~ This is the book (that) [you/everyone] should buy.

Going in the reverse direction, you remove information:

Here is the trash that we agreed you would take out. ~ Here's the trash to take out.

CJ

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you, Mr.Jim, for your very helpful advice and answer, and I am sorry for my poor examples.

I'd just like to know how I should rephrase a relative clause into any form of phrase in terms of tense.

And here are my assumptions.

1. When the tense of a major clause precede it of a relative clause: we can transform that using to-infinitive.
2. When the tense of a relative clause is equal to it of a major clause: we can transform that using present participle.
3. When the tense of a relative clause precede it of a major clause: we can transform this using present participle or perfect to-infinitive.

Up to here, am I right?

AlpheccaStars · Answer

park sang joonI'd just like to know how I should rephrase a relative clause into any form of phrase in terms of tense.

Not all relative clauses can be transformed.

In a restrictive relative clause, the relative pronoun and helping verb can be removed if the subject is the same as the antecedent. This ellipsis is common:

The woman who was wearing the red satin gown won the Oscar.
The woman ~~who was~~ wearing the red satin gown won the Oscar.

The houses that were built before 1900 were not damaged by the storm.
The houses ~~that were~~ built before 1900 were not damaged by the storm. (passive voice)

The boy who is walking his dog is my old school friend.
The boy ~~who is~~ walking his dog is my old school friend.

The infinitives are special cases. The express purpose or recommendation. They more commonly follow an adjective, not a noun.

http://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/english-grammar/verbs/infinitive

The perfect infinitive is much rarer. It is used when the action is past relative to the main clause:

I am happy to meet you.

I am happy to have met you at the opera last week.

He was surprised to have been invited for an interview with Google.

CalifJim · Answer

park sang joonhere are my assumptions

I don't think any of those assumptions are generally true, even if they may apply in individual examples.

park sang joon1. When the tense of a ~~major~~ main clause ~~precede it~~ precedes that of a relative clause

In this assumption, and in the other two, you are talking about the relationship between tenses in two clauses. There is no 100%-sure rule about which non-finite constructions can be substituted on the basis of this relationship.

You can show anteriority by using the perfect form of a participle, but that's independent of anything we know about relative clauses.

Seeing her cousin for the first time in 30 years, she broke down in tears.
(Her tears came at the same time she saw her cousin.)
Having seen the sights of London, they took the train to Paris.
(The trip to Paris came after their time in London.)

But note that the participle clauses at the beginning of these sentences are have nothing to do with transformations of relative clauses.

CJ

Park sang joon · Answer

4. Mary told her friend that leaving her alone at the mall was a shoddy thing for him to have done.
<Source: Vocabulary Cartoons Level 1 by Sam • Max • Bryan Burchers>

I'd like to know why in this example, the underlined to-infinitive phrase can be used in the place of a relative clause.

CalifJim · Answer

park sang joon4. Mary told her friend that leaving her alone at the mall was a shoddy thing for him to have done.I'd like to know why in this example, the underlined to-infinitive phrase can be used in the place of a relative clause.

What relative clause do you think the to-infinitive phrase replaces? I can't think of any particularly idiomatic relative clauses that could go there.

Here's another variant to consider:

For him to have left her alone at the mall was a shoddy thing to do.

CJ

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Or:
Leaving her alone at the mall was a shoddy thing for him to do.

Park sang joon · Answer

Thank you both for your kind another answer of you.

The infinitives are special cases. The express purpose or recommendation. They more commonly follow an adjective, not a noun.
The perfect infinitive is much rarer. It is used when the action is past relative to the main clause:
I am happy to meet you.
I am happy to have met you at the opera last week.
He was surprised to have been invited for an interview with Google.

5. Mary told her friend that leaving her alone at the mall was a shoddy thing (that) he did.
I think #4 is another version of #5.

To-infinitive vs relative pronoun

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions