Would you explain the difference of nuance between #1 and #2 ?

Question

#1-  I was this close to getting a chair on the Polish Philharmonic.#2-  I was this close to get a chair on the Polish Philharmonic.

Cool Breeze · Accepted Answer

To is a preposition in your sentences and requires the gerund. Only #1 is correct.

CB

Ljswave · Answer

Cool BreezeTo is a preposition in your sentences and requires the gerund. Only #1 is correct.

#1- I was this close to getting a chair on the Polish Philharmonic
#2- I was this close to get a chair on the Polish Philharmonic

First ,Thank you for your answer.
One more thing, as you wrote, to is a preposition but Can "to", preposition place next to both gerund and verb ? example as ) I was happy to get my health again.
I think "to" is a preposition in this line. Am I wrong? so I think #2 is grammatical.

I make a sentence like "I was happy to getting my health again." . Is it wrong?

Would you explain what i can't understand easily?

Cool Breeze · Answer

ljswaveI was happy to get my health again.

In this sentence to is not a preposition. It's part of the infinitive to get. Some grammarians call it an infinitive marker and some grammarians whose native language isn't English call it a particle in their grammar books written for foreign students of English.

Close is an adjective which is often followed by the preposition to. You can see that it is a preposition, not an infinitive marker, if you put something other than a verb after it:

He was close to me.

In the above sentence, to cannot be a part of an infinitive because me isn't a verb. It must be a preposition. All prepositions require a gerund, the ing-form:

I'm interested in seeing it.
We talked about buying a new house.
He is used to smoking cigars.

CB

Would you explain the difference of nuance between #1 and #2 ?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions