How can you predict which verbs take which type of infinitive as their complements? For example, is the to before open here mandatory, forbidden, or optional?        The Gold Monetization Scheme will be revamped to enable people open a hassle-free gold deposit account.   The Gold Monetization Scheme will be revamped to enable people to open a hassle-free gold deposit account.      In other words, does the verb enable:   take only a bare-infinitive complement the way let does? take only a to-infinitive complement the way allow does?  take an optional to before its infinitive complement the way help does?   How can you tell which verb does which thing?
122956
Why can't you say:      "I insist you to do that!"     After all, you can say:      "I want you to do that!"   What's the difference between these two verbs, that they need to be used in sentences with different structures?
4507
What is the correct way to use infinitive after the verb "help": with or without "to"?  For example:     Please, help me to understand this.   or:     Please, help me understand this.
7539
I'm wondering whether or not the verb form that follows a catenative verb has the grammatical function of a noun or of a verb, and whether or not it depends on the first catenative verb.  "I like to run" "I like running"  the -ing and the to infinitive can easily be switched in this sentence, and it seems to be implying "I like [the act of[running]]", so both the infinitive and the gerund are nouns.  "I like to run marathons"/"I like running marathons"   These seem like they might still be nouns but need "verb powers" to take the object, and then these sentences really turn into "I like [the act of [running marathons]]"/ "I like [to be in the state of [running marathons]]".  Is this true for both the -ing (and so it would be a gerund) and the to-infinitive? Are they, sort of, initially verbs so that they can take the object, and then the verb + object becomes a noun phrase?  If this is true, I'm also wondering if the same rules apply for a catenative verb such as "start".  "I started to run in the mornings" "I started running marathons in 2008"  "start" is a catenative verb that isn't a cognitive/emotion verb, and specifically suggests action. So what is the grammatical function of the to-infinitive and -ing verb forms? are they verbs? are they nouns? It just seems incorrect to say that their grammatical function is a noun, but everything I've seen on the internet is pretty vague. I've also seen that to-infinitives are never verbs, but only from one source and it just doesn't seem right to me.  So any ideas on the true grammatical function of the -ing and the to-infinitive after a catenative verb? And is it universal across catenative verbs, or does it depend on the verb category?
69408
I want to see you.   I look forward to seeing you.      How can one say "to" in the first sentence is an infinitive marker and in the second sentence a preposition when we are given just the following two sentences and are asked to fill in the blanks?        I want to ____(see/seeing) you.   I look forward to __(see/seeing) you.
83254
"I already knew how to do it."[Tr included within Tsit]..., in this imperfective aspectuality which is reference time and situation time please answer for this by using time line because in this sentence there are two verbs(knew and do) are used so it is difficult to understand imperfective aspectuality from this sentence ? The sentence is in CGEL page no.126
56938
Why is it that we have to use the gerund form for the first example? I have been told that it is not grammatical to use the infinitive form.  For some verbs, it's okay:     I wanted to study English.   I had to study English.   I needed to study English.   I tried to study English.   I traveled to study English.   But, for some verbs, it's incorrect:     I ended up to study English.     Why is that the case?
99079
I want to say this sentence:     Could you help me to find a financial support please?   Would it be more correct to say to find or to say finding? Is there a general rule to determine whether to verb or verb+ing is more correct? Is there a better way to construct that sentence?
40581
I am confused about this sentence pattern (S+V+C):   I am surprised [ to see you ].  I am surprised [ at how many have never heard of it ].  I am surprised [ by his response ].  I am surprised [ that some people study the past ].    I think that the sentence &quot;I am surprised&quot; has the sentence pattern &quot;Subject + Verb + Complement&quot;. So the phrases following the complement should be adverb phrases, because they modify the complement (surprised), right? But the sentence &quot;that some people study the past&quot; is a nominal clause. It should be unable to modify the complement (surprised). So why are these following phrases able to modify the complement?  to see you at how many have never heard of it by his response that some people study the past
106014
I have been coming across this kind of sentence more and more:     She gave him a key to enable him to escape capture.   She gave him a key to enable him escape capture.   Which sentence is correct? My understanding is that the preposition should be repeated as both enable and escape are verbs.
109834
I've learned it is obligatory to invert subject and verb when 'only when' is placed at the beginning of a sentence. However, I've recently found the sentence below.  "Only when the rule can have some meaningful effect it is to be applied."  Some English teacher in my country said this sentence is grammatically correct. He said inversion shouldn't happen in this case because a pronoun 'it' is used as a subject in the main clause and 'it' refers to 'the rule'. I'm not sure whether or not the sentence is correct, but I'm pretty sure that teacher doesn't know what he is talking about.  I think that sentence should be "Only when the rule can have some meaningful effect is it to be applied."  What do you think? Is it incorrect? If so, why is that?  Many thanks in advance.
85685
English can use a lot of verbs in a reflexive context. Even ones that usually are used intransitively.     I laugh myself silly.   However, it seems like there are very few – perhaps no – verbs that ONLY work in a reflexive context.  Are there any?
30294
Does the verb &quot;provide&quot; always have to be used with &quot;with&quot;? For example,  Can you provide me with some good examples? Can you provide me some good examples? Can you provide some good examples?  I suppose it's a transitive verb, isn't it? Moreover, is the following type of usage correct?  You should provide food for your dog before you go on vacation.  If you could give me some good examples regarding &quot;provide&quot; with different types of usage, I'd appreciate that.
69525
I just read a book to learn English. And the topic I read is about the phrasal verbs, but a big doubt has come up to my mind.  Is it correct to change the position of the preposition (putting it with the verb instead of after the direct object)?  As in:  Common structure:   My wife backs me up over my decision to quit my job. We have to blow 50 balloons up for the party.  I need to break these shoes in before we run next week. Please help me out to get this job done.   So, would it be correct to do the following:   My wife backs up me over my decision to quit my job. We have to blow up 50 ballons for the party.  I need to break in these shoes before we run next week. Please help out me to get this job done.
70784
In order to understand the English grammar, I have to read the Grammar Section in OALD. I don't understand the grammar constituents of to-infinitives in these sentences. How can I understand them?  OALD said        Eat and to eat are both the infinitive form of the verb. Eat is called a BARE INFINITIVE and to eat is called a TO-INFINITIVE. Most verbs that take an infinitive are used with the to-infinitive.      the goldfish need to be fed. she never learned to read.     Some verbs can be used with both a noun phrase and a to-infinitive. The noun can be the object of the main verb.    Can you persuade Sheila to chair the meeting?      or the noun phrase and infinitive phrase together can be the object.    I expected her to pass the driving test first time. We'd love you to come and visit us.    My question is that in 1, can I think of the to-infinitive (to be fed and to read) is the object of need and learn, respectively？ And in 2, why can her to pass or you to come be bound together to be the object of expect or love? At the same time, why I can't think of Sheila to chair in this way?  I love our language, but can't understand its grammar :-(     Edit: What role is the to-infinitive playing in these sentences?
122257
All normal verbs can be conjugated in the future tense.     e.g. I know, I will know. I do, I will do.   But I have noticed that we cannot conjugate the modal verb can in the future tense.     can, I will can?   Although we are able to conjugate the phrase be able (that has approximately the same meaning of can) to will be able, we cannot conjugate can. Is there a way to express can in the future tense without using the expression to be able?    Additionally, need and dare are sometimes utilised as a modal verb.     I need not. Need I not? I dare say. Dare he do it?   Are we able to conjugate these verbs in the future tense as modal verbs?  If need were used as a ‘normal’ verb, an example of it in the future tense would be I will need to do it. Can we write that sentence by making need a modal verb?  Thank you.
71436
Is there a rule for using gerunds and infinitives instead of memorizing the verbs? I mean when to use gerund or infinitive just by looking at the sentence.
52042
What is preferable to use: verb + gerundive or verb + infinitive?  For example:  I tried checking it   or   I tried to check it  if both are possible then what's the difference? Are there any specific use cases for both gerundive and infinitive in such a construction?  Thank you.