turn

[Tdol]

It is to identify whose turn not what it is to do.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by tdol

It is to identify whose turn not what it is to do.

Isn't such identification done by "one's" in "one's turn"???

[Tdol]

The main modification of the sentence is about whose turn, not what, imho.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by tdol

The main modification of the sentence is about whose turn, not what, imho.

Really?? Then, how do you explain this sentence?:

Whose turn is it to do the dishes?

There is "to do the dishes" here, but you don't know whose turn it is.

[Tdol]

I think we're at crossed purposes here- that's exactly what I meant.

[Taka]

Originally Posted by tdol

I think we're at crossed purposes here- that's exactly what I meant.

What exactly do you mean by "crossed purpose"? Could you please elaborate it?

[Taka]

t~dol?

[Tdol]

It means there's a misunderstanding- we seem to be saying the same thing, but disagreeing with each other about the turn.

[Taka]

Ah! Now I see what you mean.
--------
Even though the restrictiveness of "to drive" in "your turn to drive" is not as high as that of "your", don't you think that the infinitive still works as an identification of the turn, quasi-restrictive usage so to speak?

If I apply your definition of adjective to other cases, like "your job to do" or "their food to eat", all those infinitives are not going to be adjectival. Are they not?

[Tdol]

It does identify the purpose of the turn, but it isn't as high as 'your'. In phrases like 'their food to eat', the infinitive seems more of an intensifier than anything else- it just stresses what we already know. I don't think it's really telling me that this is the purpose of the food, just emphasising that it is truly theirs.