to do or do

[ostap77]

"We had no choice but to leave."

OR

"We had no choice but leave."

"They've done nothing but read all afternoon."

OR

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

Do I have to use "to" or I can leave it out?

 

[Allen165]

"We had no choice but to leave."

OR

"We had no choice but leave."

"They've done nothing but read all afternoon."

OR

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

Do I have to use "to" or I can leave it out?

NOT A TEACHER.

Only sentences one and three are correct.

 

[5jj]

1. "We had no choice but to leave."
2. "We had no choice but leave."
3. "They've done nothing but read all afternoon."
4. "They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

#1 and #3 sound fine to me.

 

[ostap77]

#1 and #3 sound fine to me.

Would there be an infinitive in sentence #3? (.......nothing but read)

"John was appointed his superior. So he couldn't do anything but do what he said." OK?

 

[TheParser]

"We had no choice but leave."

"They've done nothing but read all afternoon."

OR

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

Do I have to use "to" or I can leave it out?[/QUOTE]


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


(1) The Senior Member and the Key Member have both given us

excellent answers.

(2) May I most respectfully add what I found in my books and on the

Web?

(a) Nowadays, it is, indeed, preferable to use the to-infinitive after

nouns such as "choice" or "alternative."

(i) Professor George O. Curme explains that "I have no choice but to

accept the fact" is just a short way to say "I have no choice but

the choice to accept the fact." Of course, we would never say

"I have no choice but the choice accept the fact." So that's why

I guess we had better use "to." NEVERTHELESS, my Web research

showed me that some earlier English writers had no problem in simply

using the bare (no "to") infinitive after choice. In fact, probably some

native speakers nowadays would not go crazy if you said "I have no

choice but go" -- especially in rapid conversation.

(b) Professor Curme says (back in 1931 when he wrote his masterpiece)

that we "often" use the bare infinitive in:

There is nothing to do/ We have nothing to do but enjoy ourselves.

IF (a big "IF") I understand him, the original sentence going way back

into English grammar is something like:

We have nothing to do but that (conjunction) we [do] enjoy ourselves.

The great scholar then adds that we "often" use the to-infinitive

because people feel that we are dealing with an infinitive clause:

"I am sure we in England had nothing to do but to fight."

The bottom line: If you use "to" in both constructions, you will be

speaking/writing "good" English.

 

[freezeframe]

"We had no choice but leave."

"They've done nothing but read all afternoon."

OR

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

Do I have to use "to" or I can leave it out?

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


(1) The Senior Member and the Key Member have both given us

excellent answers.

(2) May I most respectfully add what I found in my books and on the

Web?

(a) Nowadays, it is, indeed, preferable to use the to-infinitive after

nouns such as "choice" or "alternative."

(i) Professor George O. Curme explains that "I have no choice but to

accept the fact" is just a short way to say "I have no choice but

the choice to accept the fact." Of course, we would never say

"I have no choice but the choice accept the fact." So that's why

I guess we had better use "to." NEVERTHELESS, my Web research

showed me that some earlier English writers had no problem in simply

using the bare (no "to") infinitive after choice. In fact, probably some

native speakers nowadays would not go crazy if you said "I have no

choice but go" -- especially in rapid conversation.

(b) Professor Curme says (back in 1931 when he wrote his masterpiece)

that we "often" use the bare infinitive in:

There is nothing to do/ We have nothing to do but enjoy ourselves.

IF (a big "IF") I understand him, the original sentence going way back

into English grammar is something like:

We have nothing to do but that (conjunction) we [do] enjoy ourselves.

The great scholar then adds that we "often" use the to-infinitive

because people feel that we are dealing with an infinitive clause:

"I am sure we in England had nothing to do but to fight."

The bottom line: If you use "to" in both constructions, you will be

speaking/writing "good" English.

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon" sounds "good" to you?

I appreciate that you are into "good English" (whatever that means) but grammar books from 1931, even if the author is "the great scholar", aren't the best sources of how to write in English today and might not be the best sources for someone who's learning English and cannot tell how different constructions or word choices will be perceived by native speakers. Similarly "going way back into English grammar" (whatever that means) is of interest only if you're into historic linguistics or something like that, not if you're trying to learn modern English for some pragmatic reason like communication or getting a job.

 

[TheParser]

Would there be an infinitive in sentence #3? (.......nothing but read)

"John was appointed his superior. So he couldn't do anything but do what he said." OK?

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


Here are some examples from Professor Curme's fantastic book:

He could not [do anything] but fail.

I cannot [do anything] but admire his courage.

The great scholar put "do anything" in brackets because he says that

speakers often omit those words.

So I guess that your sentence could be:

So he couldn't [do anything] but do what he said.

(I am guessing that your sentence is the short, "modern" way to say:

So he could not do anything but that (conjunction) he [did] do what he

said.)

 

[TheParser]

"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon" sounds "good" to you?

I appreciate that you are into "good English" (whatever that means) but grammar books from 1931, even if the author is "the great scholar", aren't the best sources of how to write in English today and might not be the best sources for someone who's learning English and cannot tell how different constructions or word choices will be perceived by native speakers. Similarly "going way back into English grammar" (whatever that means) is of interest only if you're into historic linguistics or something like that, not if you're trying to learn modern English for some pragmatic reason like communication or getting a job.

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


(1) Thank you for your kind note.

(2) That is why we non-teachers must warn everyone at the

start of a post: NOT A TEACHER. Then visitors can skip my

posts and go on to those of language professionals such as you.

(3) In fact, some people want this website to allow only language

professionals such as you to post answers in the "Ask a Teacher"

forum.

(4) At another helpline (which I no longer visit), they have the same

problem and have warned that non-professionals who post wrong

answers will have their posts deleted.

 

[Soup]

The following 2 examples are odd in my dialect of English:

"We had no choice but leave."
"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

 

[ostap77]

The following 2 examples are odd in my dialect of English:

"We had no choice but leave."
"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

So it depends on the speaker or area he comes from when it comes down to using either the "to" infinitive or bare infinitive?

 

[bhaisahab]

The following 2 examples are odd in my dialect of English:

"We had no choice but leave."
"They've done nothing but to read all afternoon."

And in mine.

 

[Soup]

So it depends on the speaker or area he comes from when it comes down to using either the "to" infinitive or bare infinitive?

For you examples? Not at all. It depends on meaning:


1. We had no choice but to leave.

• We had no choice but to do this.
• We had no choice but to leave.
• We had no choice but leave. :cross:

2. They did nothing but read.

• They read.
• They to read. :cross: