to/for

[navi tasan]

Are these sentences all correct:

1-You have damaged the car to take us out of here.
2-You have damaged the car to get out of here in.
3-You have damaged the car in which we could get out of here.
4-You have damaged the car for getting out of here.

5-Send the medication to cure me via mail.
6-You have forgotten to send the medication to cure me.
7-You have forgotten to send the medication for curing me.

[Casiopea]

All are incorrect.

[navi tasan]

Thanks Cas.

I can't see why they are wrong though, if one considers that the clauses postmodify the noun.


This is the car to take you there.
The car (which was) to take you there was damaged by him.
He damaged the car (which was) to take you there.

[Casiopea]

Independent Clause: You have damaged the car.

Modification
Question: Which car?
Answer: The car that was (supposed) to take us out of here.

Relative Clause: that was (supposed) to take us out of here.

EX: You have damaged the car that was (supposed) to take us out of here.

Note, 'that' functions as the subject, and 'was (supposed to take)' functions as the verb'.