He began/started crying/to cry.

[Sammy Sam]

Why do they have difference structures, if they communicate the same meanings
?

1. He began/started crying.
2. He began/started to cry.

Are they both grammatical?
Do they have different meanings?

 

[Barque]

Why do they have different difference structures, if they communicate the same meaningsmeaning?

You can often express an idea in more than one way. That's true of various other languages too, not just English.

Are they both grammatical?
Do they have different meanings?

Yes.
No.

 

[Concealedpersona]

Not a teacher

Yes, both sentences are grammatical. They communicate the same meaning, but with a slightly different emphasis. In the first sentence, "began crying" places more emphasis on the action itself, while in the second sentence, "began to cry" places more emphasis on the process of starting to cry. There is no difference in meaning between the two sentences.(same thing we can apply for "started to")

 

[emsr2d2]

Not a teacher

Yes, both sentences are grammatical. They communicate the same meaning, but with a slightly different emphasis. In the first sentence, "began crying" places more emphasis on the action itself, while in the second sentence, "began to cry" places more emphasis on the process of starting to cry. There is no difference in meaning between the two sentences. space here (The same thing we can apply applies for to "started to".)

@Concealedpersona I have added "Not a teacher" to your post. Please do this yourself whenever you respond to another learner. Alternatively, you can make it your signature line. Also note my corrections.

I agree that both are grammatically correct. However, in BrE at least, "began crying" doesn't sound particularly natural. We'd tend to choose either "started crying" or "began to cry".

 

[Concealedpersona]

@Concealedpersona I have added "Not a teacher" to your post. Please do this yourself whenever you respond to another learner. Alternatively, you can make it your signature line. Also note my corrections.

Sure.

 

[Skrej]

There are some small differences, plus the gerund and infinitive are not always 100% interchangeable in all cases. Verb tense governs usage somewhat.


With 'begin', you can use the gerund or infinitive in non-continuous tenses, with little to no difference in meaning.
I began to cry when I heard the bad news. (crying started and continued for unspecified time)
I began crying when I heard the bad news. (crying started and continued for unspecified time)

With 'begin' and continuous tenses, you can only use the infinitive.
The baby is beginning to cry. (crying has commenced and is on-going)

Similarly, 'start' can use both the gerund or infinitive in non-continuous tenses, although there's a possibility of difference in meaning.

With 'start' and a non-continuous tense, there's simply an indication that the action in the gerund has initiated.
Tom started crying when he heard the news. (crying started, with no indication of duration)

In a non-continuous tense 'start+ infinitive' usually suggests that the action in the infinitive wasn't completed or continued.
I started to cry but quit when John walked in the room. (crying started, but was prematurely halted)

However, with 'start' and a continuous tense, you can again only use the infinitive.
Roger is starting to cry about his lost puppy. (crying has commenced and is on-going. )