0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
Two split infinitives
By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse:
organisms are not allowed to directly write to or read from each other's genomes
Putting "directly" before "to" would be stilted & require the reader to detach it from "allowed". There's no other place for it except at the very end, which is distractingly far from the verbs. Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs. Not literary English, but compact & clear.
these mutants are not able to successfully replicate (or at least not well)
The emphasis in this clause is clearly on the adverb "successfully" (as is shown by the contrast with "well"). It belongs in its normal emphatic position, after the verb and, here, next to the parenthesis that refers to it. After "replicate (or at least" the reader naturally expects another verb, and is disappointed.
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
organisms are not allowed to directly write to or read from each other's genomes
Putting "directly" before "to" would be stilted & require the reader to detach it from "allowed". There's no other place for it except at the very end, which is distractingly far from the verbs. Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs. Not literary English, but compact & clear.
these mutants are not able to successfully replicate (or at least not well)
The emphasis in this clause is clearly on the adverb "successfully" (as is shown by the contrast with "well"). It belongs in its normal emphatic position, after the verb and, here, next to the parenthesis that refers to it. After "replicate (or at least" the reader naturally expects another verb, and is disappointed.
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
Top answer
[nq:1]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse: organisms ... the verbs. Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs.
- [nq:1]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse: organisms ...
- the verbs.
- Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs.
- [/nq] I don't agree with this, though I am not one who requires unsplit infiinitives.
- I read the sentence, as written, to say that writing directly is not allowed, and that reading is not allowed.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
[nq:1]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse: organisms ... the verbs. Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs. Not literary English, but compact & clear.[/nq]
I don't agree with this, though I am not one who requires unsplit infiinitives. I read the sentence, as written, to say that writing directly is not allow
I don't agree with this, though I am not one who requires unsplit infiinitives. I read the sentence, as written, to say that writing directly is not allow
00
[nq:1]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse: organisms ... the parenthesis that refers to it. After "replicate (or at least" the reader naturally expects another verb, and is disappointed.[/nq]
Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".
Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".
00
[nq:1]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted pair of split infinitives one sensible, one perverse: organisms ... the verbs. Where it is, it is clear that it modifies both verbs. Not literary English, but compact & clear.[/nq]
I don't agree. It seems best at the end, and its distance from the verbs is not only irrelevant (consider German, where the verb may be some miles from th
I don't agree. It seems best at the end, and its distance from the verbs is not only irrelevant (consider German, where the verb may be some miles from th
00
[nq:2]these mutants are not able to successfully replicate (or at ... least" the reader naturally expects another verb, and is disappointed.[/nq]
[nq:1]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
[nq:1]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?
Joe Fineman (Email Removed)
00
[nq:2]By chance, a single MS has yielded a nicely contrasted ... modifies both verbs. Not literary English, but compact & clear.[/nq]
[nq:1]I don't agree. It seems best at the end, and its distance from the verbs is not only irrelevant (consider German, where the verb may be some miles from the subject)[/nq]
Making fun of German syntax is one of the privileges we Anglophones have enjoyed s
[nq:1]I don't agree. It seems best at the end, and its distance from the verbs is not only irrelevant (consider German, where the verb may be some miles from the subject)[/nq]
Making fun of German syntax is one of the privileges we Anglophones have enjoyed s
00
Joe Fineman (Email Removed) wrote on 11 Dec 2003:
[nq:2]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
[nq:1]I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?[/nq]
I think that andrew misunderstands what "replication" means. While he thinks that it means to give birth to healthy offspring that have a fighting chance
[nq:2]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
[nq:1]I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?[/nq]
I think that andrew misunderstands what "replication" means. While he thinks that it means to give birth to healthy offspring that have a fighting chance
00
On 11 Dec 2003 10:18:39 -0500, Joe Fineman
[nq:2]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
[nq:1]I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?[/nq]
these mutants are not able to successfully replicate (or at least not to satisfactorily replicate)
[nq:2]Successfully should not be there at all. "Not well" should go with "replicate".[/nq]
[nq:1]I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?[/nq]
these mutants are not able to successfully replicate (or at least not to satisfactorily replicate)
00
[nq:2]I don't understand this. Could you write out the clause as you think it should be?[/nq]
[nq:1]I think that andrew misunderstands what "replication" means. While he thinks that it means to give birth to healthy offspring ... live to maturity but be plagued by disease or mutations that prevent them from guaranteeing the survival of the species.[/nq]
The sentence as it stands does not m
[nq:1]I think that andrew misunderstands what "replication" means. While he thinks that it means to give birth to healthy offspring ... live to maturity but be plagued by disease or mutations that prevent them from guaranteeing the survival of the species.[/nq]
The sentence as it stands does not m
00
[nq:1]The sentence as it stands does not make sense. The possibility of unsuccessful replication is provided by the adverbial phrase "at least not[/nq]
I meant, "the possibility of successful replication".
I meant, "the possibility of successful replication".
0
Related Questions