The omission of 'to' in to-infitive.

[wotcha]

We teach Korean students that there are three cases of omitting to in to-infinitives such as;

1. All I did was to study English.

2. What I did was to wait for her.

3. The only thins I did was to eat and sleep all day.


My first question is "Is 'to' omitted in present sentences?" like;

4. All I do is study English.

5. What I do is wait for her.

6. The only thins I do is eat and sleep all day.


Secondly, is 'to' omitted in cases of 'no-did-sentence'? I mean;

7. All I want is see you.

8. What I need is make money.

9. The only thing I miss about NZ is hang around with my friends.


Are 7,8 and 9 grammatical, too?

[nelson13]

We teach Korean students that there are three cases of omitting to in to-infinitives such as;

1. All I did was to study English.

2. What I did was to wait for her.

3. The only thins I did was to eat and sleep all day.


My first question is "Is 'to' omitted in present sentences like;

4. All I do is study English.

5. What I do is wait for her.

6. The only thins I do is eat and sleep all day.


Secondly, is 'to' omitted in cases of 'no-did-sentence'? I mean;

7. All I want is see you.

8. What I need is make money.

9. The only thing I miss about NZ is hang around with my friends.


Are 7,8 and 9 grammatical, too?

You will not expect a non-native speaker to answer your question. But I still want to try. Anyone is welcome to comment on my answer.

In reply to your question, the answer is NO. Not grammatical.

If you view sentences 1-6, you will find they are all DO-sentences or sentences containing an inflection of DO;and DO in this case has a special usage that can leave out TO. But no other verbs.

[Tdol]

I would use to in 7 & 8 and the gerund in 9.

[5jj]

I would use to in 7 & 8 and the gerund in 9.

So would I.

[emsr2d2]

With #3 and #6 you need to use "things" and "are/were". I would also change the word order:

3. The only things I did all day were eat and sleep.
6. The only things I do all day are eat and sleep.