This is the sentence that has made me wonder usage of 'to infinitive'.   We have three session to learn about history.   And I think this sentence is the same meaning as the following 2 sentences, which is more familiar with me.   We have three sessions where we learn about history.  We have three sessions in which we learn about history.    Q1. So, can I use which sentence I like to use among #1,2 and 3 because they are interchangable? And I looked it up on the internet to understand how to use 'to infinitive', especially ones that is used to modify a noun right after it. And I've made the two sentences that I think is better than #1 grammatically.   We have three sessions in which (for us) to learn about history.  We have three session (for us) to learn about history in.    Q2. I think #1 has to be replaced with 5, adding 'in' at the end of the sentence because when we remove 'which' in #4 we need to let 'in(preposition)' be at the end of the phrase. Am I right to think this way? ps. Can I add 'for us' to clarify the sentence in #4,5?
121287
I'd like to know how exactly 'infinitive' modifies a noun.        I suggest you write out the speech you will be giving at the conference and practice it as many times as possible. When you think you're ready, gather up some people to listen to your speech, so you can have a rehearsal before the conference starts.      what's the meaning of people to listen to your speech?  (a) people who is willing to listen to your speech.  (b) people who is able to listen to your speech.        If you need anyone to talk with about this matter, just remember that I'm always here.      what's the meaning of anyone to talk with about this matter?  (c) anyone who is willing to talk with you about this matter.  (d) anyone that you can talk with about this matter.  I don't think there's an answer among abcd, so please let me know know to transform it to a relative clause.
62136
What is the proper way to combine past tense of do (did) with multiple bare infinitives in a question:   Did you go to vacation or stay at home? Did you go to vacation or stayed at home? Did you go to vacation or did you stay at home?   The last one is always correct, but I assume shorter form is more desirable, especially if more than two verbs are involved: Did you go to vacation, stay/stayed at home, go/went to work, or do/did something forth?  Also, if the second form is not correct, could it be transformed to Did you go to vacation or you stayed at home? I assume that this form has a little bit different meaning, because the emphasis is on vacation, and staying at home is just mentioned as one of the alternatives. Basically, this form can be answered with Yes or No, while the aforementioned three ones cannot (I offered two equally probable alternatives in the question). Does my reasoning on this make sense?  I am not a native English speaker and I caught myself using the second form occasionally (although it seems to clearly break the rule auxiliary verb + bare infinitive).
2595
When telling a story about myself from the past, I have found myself in an internal debate over whether the correct way to segue into the present is:     That was me twelve years ago.   Or:     That was I twelve years ago.   My instincts tell me the first is correct (object pronoun after a verb and it sounds better to my ears). But, I'm not sure if pronouns after linking verbs should be object pronouns. Which is correct?
3526
Are these two sentences grammatically correct?   Mona told me that London was the biggest city in England. He wanted to know where Manchester was.   I found these two sentences by chance in an exercise book published by Egypt's  Ministry of Education. Both sentences talk about a fact, and Is it unreasonable to change the verb tense in reported speech to past simple when what the sentences talks about is still true? (As my teacher and the books say.) Or is it right when we talk about facts to change the tense or is the tense change optional and  both are correct?
47458
Should I use the second "will" in constructions like this one: "it will definitely help you and will make the text more readable"  And should I write "to" before every infinitive in enumeration, or only before the first one, e.g. "it helps to develop and test" or "it helps to develop and to test"? Could this example be influenced by the fact that "help" can go with to-invinitive and bare infinitive, and with other verbs the rule would be different?
96795
In 1999, I was living in Cuba.      In 1999, I lived in Cuba.   Do both sentences seem grammatically correct?   My teacher had told that the first sentence, which is with past continuous, is incorrect. I don't know whether or not the first sentence is correct. It indeed seems natural, doesn't it?
33681
I can't wrap my head around some English news titles with infinitives (I have tried to Google this, hopelessly). Some examples:   Russia's Head Athletics Coach to Step Down After Doping Revelations Russia to Create Government Job to Fight Doping in Sport Russian Olympic Champion Kaniskina to Quit Executive Role Over Doping Scandal   What is this use of infinitives called, and what does it mean?
107637
I know that there are two ways to form the past tense of to light (i.e. lit/lighted). Which one is appropriate for the sentence below?     His thoughts lighted our way.   or     His thoughts lit our way.
108642
I was in a Teacher's selection for a school in my country, and one of the coordinators said that she heard a mistake from another teacher that was unacceptable. I tried to figure out why was that, but I thought it was silly and forgot about it. Then I was asking about the weekend in my classroom and one of my Ss said the same sentence. I corrected him according to the coordinator, as she is way more experienced than me, but I couldn't actually explain why to him. The sentence was:     I went to the church.   I can't see the mistake in this sentence if the church had been previously mentioned in the context of the conversation. I understand, as a non-native speaker, that if you are talking to a person that doesn't have any idea of where you were and doesn't have any previous information about the specific place, the article 'the' should not be used. Also, I am assuming church as a count noun. So instead, we would say:     I went to a church.   Is it correct to use the indefinite article since I don't have any idea of which church he is talking about?   I made a research about it and found that places that people use in common (like school, church, hospital, work) but are not necessarily the same, we would omit the article, so we would use the sentence that the coordinator accept:      I went to church.   Like this sounds strange to me, but since I am not a native speaker, I think that it is OK.   I really don't think that it was an unacceptable mistake, since the use of the article will depend on the context. So, if I am talking to my student, asking what he did last weekend and we were not talking about anything before, which one should he use?
80181
I'm a passionate Korean English-learner, and I would like to ask you a question about grammar.   It was 3 years ago when I first started to study the to-infinitive as studying grammar with Grammar In Use series and English Grammar series by Longman, having been exposed to English for 3 years. There wasn't any mention of the author saying that the usage of the to-infinitive is as an (direct) object. And for me also, the times I have encountered sentences in which the usage of the to-infinitive, so to speak, as direct objects were used, I've read them as some kind of obligatory adverbial that shows what the verbs are about, not as objects, which means they are noun phases! 100% of Korean textbooks say the usage is as a direct object, but I doubt it. I think it's some kind of obligatory adverbial that shows what the verbs are about.    I thought it was better for me to ask Americans themselves. Do you read this usage of to-infinitive as a noun phrase or an adverbial?
17149
I have never had this problem before. But after seeing some questions posted on ELU, I started to doubt. I have been through links1, pages of grammar books2, a lot of questions3 posted here and ELU. I now still can't seem to understand how the past perfect is exactly used. The references sometimes even contradict each other.  What I had understood so far was      The past perfect is not necessary if we are not 'going back' to the earlier past, and simply moving from one event to another.   but I then saw a lot of other 'rules' including      If the sequence is clear, the past perfect is not needed.   which is slightly different, less 'narrow' and can be applied in more situations than the first ruleA, and      The past perfect is optional only when talking about an action at a specific time.   This is confusing. Can anyone here clarify things out please?    A For example, for  Doing the survey [completed] -&gt; Showing the result      We showed the result of the survey we did.      If the second rule is applied, the sentence above is fine (the sequence is clear), but not if the first rule since we are not moving from any event to the next and possibly even going back.    1  and   2 Practical English Usage (2005) by Michael Swan, Collins Cobuild Student's Grammar (1991). Upper-Intermediate Cutting Edge.  3 including , , ,  etc.
65097
a. His two previous books  b. His previous two books   .............   His 2 latest previous books His 2 previous latest books His previous latest 2 books His latest previous 2 books His previous 2 latest books His latest 2 previous books  I am wondering what is the difference could be between these in meaning?  Which one do you use? which one you don't use?  I think just especially native speakers or learned ones in English can provide the most proper answer.  Thanks
122063
Is this sentence correct?      I did it yesterday, but I’m not going to do it again.   I’m not sure about it. Should I replace “it” with “that”?         I did it yesterday, but I’m not going to do it again.    I did it yesterday, but I’m not going to do that again.    I did that yesterday, but I’m not going to do it again.    I did that yesterday, but I’m not going to do that again.       Are all versions correct?
24530
I would like someone to explain me how the sense of a sentence changes with using "for me" or "to me":  Some examples:     1a.  She is a good friend to me.   1b.  She is a good friend for me.        2a.  How special you are to me.   2b.  How special you are for me.        3a.  It's an interesting topic to me.   3b.  It's an interesting topic for me.
29555
Today an excruciating accident has taken place in our vicinity. Today an excruciating accident took place in our vicinity.   Today indicates the present time. So I prefer has taken, which has been used in first sentence. But a native speaker of English said that he would prefer took place, though he didn't tell me why he would do this.  Now I ask to the members of this site what do they think about this?
110994
I let him do it.   and     I allow him to do it.   Why does the latter require to?  What are the "rules" of using to with an infinitive? When is it necessary?
39069
I believe the sentence in the title is grammatically correct.   Recently I've seen too many people writing it this way:     I'm not sure what is the right way.   Is it grammatically correct as well? Maybe in a different sense? Or simply misuse by non-native speakers?