Use of infinitive

[viktorrija]

Hello :)
So i came across this sentence "What would a wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV say?."
And now I wonder what kind of grammar structure is this ("comes to find")? May someone explain me why it's used here, and when this type of structures are used? Am I right saying that it's same as to say "comes and finds"?

[nelson13]

Hello :)
So i came across this sentence "What would a wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV say?."
And now I wonder what kind of grammar structure is this ("comes to find")? May someone explain me why it's used here, and when this type of structures are used? Am I right saying that it's same as to say "comes and finds"?

First of all, your sentence is interesting, but you shouldn't have focused on TO FIND.

My opinion is that TO FIND sounds similar to ONLY TO DO SOMETHING, which is usually used to say something disappointing,

eg She turned up the driveway, only to find her way blocked.

On the other hand, you should've asked why the tenses are not consistent, which is my question and I hope a native English speaker can tell:

What would a wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV say?

Is it OK to use CAME?

[Grumpy]

Yes.

[SoothingDave]

My opinion is that TO FIND sounds similar to ONLY TO DO SOMETHING, which is usually used to say something disappointing,

Finding the husband in front of the TV and the dishes in the sink is disappointing.

"Came home to find' is OK, but it describes a one time event in the past. "Comes home to find" describes the situation as it is happening but can also indicate a habitual action.

[Grumpy]

Another aspect of this is that the "say" is too far separated from "a wife". Better to phrase it as "What would a wife say if she came home to find....etc"

[anhnha]

"Came home to find' is OK, but it describes a one time event in the past. "Comes home to find" describes the situation as it is happening but can also indicate a habitual action.

Does this also mean that "would" in the below sentence isn't the past form of "will"?
What would a wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV say?

[emsr2d2]

Does this also mean that "would" in the below sentence isn't the past form of "will"?
What would a wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV say?

You're right. It's not the past tense of "will". It's a hypothetical present/future.

The past form of "will" in that situation is "would have + verb".


What would a wife [who came home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV] have said?

[TheParser]

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


Hello,

May I add my two cents to the excellent answers from all the other posters?

1. As Grumpy brilliantly pointed out, let's push the verb to the front:

a. What would a wife say who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her hubby watching TV?

2. Now let's follow Nelson's great suggestion to add the word "only."

a. What would a wife say who comes home only to find dirty dishes in the sink and her hubby watching TV?

i. This construction (sentence type) of "only + to ___" is quite popular in American English. It usually indicates

surprise. Here is a bad example of mine:

I sat down on the sofa only to notice a large spider crawling on the wall.

(a) Without "only," the sentence might mean that the purpose of my sitting down was so that I could notice the

large spider. Of course, that was not the reason for my sitting down. (Actually, I sat down in order to read the

newspaper, NOT in order to notice a spider on the wall!!!)


James

[viktorrija]

Hello again
Thank you all for noticing the mistake in the sentence... Well I wrote it from memory and it was wrong.
I just checked in the book, and the original was "A wife who comes home to find dirty dishes in the sink and her husband watching TV." But as i remembered it in my native language, i translated it wrong.
Actually the only thin that bothered me was that "verb+to+verb" (when it's not about choosing between gerund/or infinitive). Because most of structures sound similar to my native language, so sometimes it's easy to understand, but this structure just caught my eye too many times.

My opinion is that TO FIND sounds similar to ONLY TO DO SOMETHING, which is usually used to say something disappointing,

eg She turned up the driveway, only to find her way blocked.

this is the most understandable for me of all THANK YOU A LOT.

a. What would a wife say who comes home only to find dirty dishes in the sink and her hubby watching TV?

i. This construction (sentence type) of "only + to ___" is quite popular in American English. It usually indicates

surprise. Here is a bad example of mine:

I sat down on the sofa only to notice a large spider crawling on the wall.

(a) Without "only," the sentence might mean that the purpose of my sitting down was so that I could notice the

large spider. Of course, that was not the reason for my sitting down. (Actually, I sat down in order to read the

newspaper, NOT in order to notice a spider on the wall!!!)

This one was good too, just that "only" in the sentence doesn't sound naturally for me as it seems that you say. ;)
Thank you all anyway!